i:fei  a  ^:2^  Q^  .^x,  i:a.  "^2^ 

OF    TUK 

AT 

PRINCETON,   N.  J. 
SAMUEL    AQNEW, 

OF     PHILAUKLPHIA,     PA. 

q4^o - 


—TV  "- 


Sx"'j"oiS'ledma„.    1773- 

the    recognition   oi 


CONSIDERATIONS 


RESPECTING 


THE  RECOGNITION  OF  FRIENDS  IN  ANOTHER  WORLD; 


AFFIRMED  DESCENT  OF  JESUS  CHRIST  INTO  HELL; 


PHRENOLOGY  IN  CONNEXION  WITH  THE  SOUL 


ON  THE  EXISTENCE  OF  A  SOUL  IN  BRUTES. 

BY 

JOHN  REDMAN  COXE,  M.D. 


La  maniere  dont  Dieu  a  oper6,  est  cach6e  dans  ses  secrets. — II  nous  est  permis  dc 
lea  examiner,  d'cn  rechercher  les  circonstances,  de  proposer  quelques  conjectures 
sur  la  maniere  dont  le  tout  s'est  passe.  Mais  il  y  auroit  de  la  temerity  de  decider 
sur  une  matiere  que  Dieu  n'a  pas  jug6  a  propos  de  nous  reveler." 

Calmkt,  sur  les  Apparitions,  &c.     Preface. 


PHILADELPHIA: 
GEORGE  S.  APPLETON,   148  CHESTNUT  STREET, 

NEW  YORIv; 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.  200  BROADWAY. 

1845. 


Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress  in  the  year  1845,  by  John  Redman  Coxe, 
M.D.  in  the  Clerk's  office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Eastern  District  of  Penn- 
sylvania. 


"John  C.  Clark,  Printer. 


INTRODUCTION 


It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  write  a  Preface  in  order  to  ex- 
plain the  nature  of  the  three  Essays  which  constitute  the 
following  pages.  They  are  in  themselves  so  short,  that  a 
'prefatory  outline  would  nearly  equal  either  of  them  in  extent. 
I  shall  therefore  merely  remark,  that  the  subjects  are  of  suffi- 
cient interest  to  induce  the  attention  of  a  few  leisure  moments; 
the  reflections  from  which  may  possibly  be  found  not  to  be 
altogether  unprofitable  to  the  reader. 

In  this  happy  country,  where  all  are  permitted  to  think  for 
themselves  (that  is,  if  they  choose),  without  restriction  from 
religious  or  sectarian  prejudices,  and  to  commit  to  the  press 
their  views  on  any  subject  that  they  may  deem  interesting  to 
themselves  or  to  others,  no  apology  is  necessary  from  the 
writer,  though  but  a  layman,  for  venturing  on  certain  topics 
of  inquiry,  which  to  many,  will  appear  altogether  the  property 
of  the  clergy.  Such,  however,  are  not  his  sentiments.  If  of 
any  importance,  they  are  equally  so  to  the  laity  as  to  the  cler- 
gy: and  if  the  former  would  more  frequently  enter  on  the 
consideration  of  congenial  subjects,  and  in  which  all  are 
alike  concerned,  it  is  probable  that  much  of  that  theological 
enmity  of  ditlerent  sects  of  Christians  now  prevaihng  through 
the  world,  might  be  softened  d.own  and  chastened,  by  dispers- 
ing the  dogmas  with  which  every  sect  abounds,  and  which, 
(the  offspring  of  theological  and  ecclesiastical  pride,  from  even 
the  times  of  the  apostles),  have  been  the  chief  means  of  sepa- 
rating the  Christian  community,  and  splitting  it  into  cliques 
and  parties,  unwarranted  by  Scripture.  The  laity,  unfortu- 
nately, at  all  times,  too  ignorant,  or  too  idle,  to  think  seriously 
for  themselves,  have  been  satisfied  to  do  that  in  spiritual, 
which  they  would  not  do  in  their  temporal  concerns,  viz:  to 
embrace  every  wild,  vague,  or  enthusiastic  notion,  that  their 
spiritual  directors  have  thought  proper  to  advance.  The  odium 
thcologicum  thus  fostered  in  the  breasts  of  those,  whose  pro- 
vince it  was  to  preach  peace  and  good  will  to  all,  soon  assumed 
the  spirit  of  party,  and  persrcution  and  death  early  followed 
in  the  train  of  the  predominant  doctrines.  Such  wholesale 
allowance  to  the  rlergy,  gave  them  a  supremacy,  that  the 
laity  have  never  been  aijle  to  the  present  time,  fully  to  shake 
off.     It  is  perhaps  a  little  moderated. — Rome  is  not  exactly 


IV  INTBODUCTION., 

what  she  was  four  centuries  agro ;  her  principles  remain  how- 
ever the  same,  and  opportunity  alone  is  wanting  to  retrace 
and  renew,  the  barbarities  of  her  ancient  hierarchy.  Even 
here,  in  this  enhghtened  age  and  country,  now,  we  see  Ameri- 
cans, professing  allegiance  to  the  United  States,  yet  fettered 
hand  and  foot  to  the  Papal  power !  Our  Protestant  brethren 
are,  in  like  manner,  though  inferior  in  degree,  made  instru- 
ments of  designing  men,  in  separations  and  divisions  of  the 
various  denominations,  to  carry  out  views,  in  which,  as  merely 
laymen,  they  have  little,  if  any  interest.  If  political  liberty 
requires  continual  watchfulness  and  unremitted  energy  to 
maintain  its  standing;  not  less  does  that  liberty  require  it,  on 
which  our  everlasting  destiny  may  depend.  And  this  can  be 
effective  only,  through  the  energy  and  determined  opposition 
of  the  laity  to  every  encroachment  on  their  rights  as  church 
members,  whether  in  modifications  of  mere  ceremonies,  as 
entering  wedges  of  some  further  innovation,  or  in  principles, 
that,  flowing  from  the  pulpit,  may  at  length  involve  them  in 
the  vortex,  and  bear  them  on  unconsciously  to  the  precincts 
of  Rome ! 

I  anticipate  a  due  degree  of  animadversion  on  the  part  of 
those  from  whom  I  may  unfortunately  differ.  I  have,  how- 
ever, long  since,  ceased  to  rest  my  absolute  faith  on  any  topic, 
religious  or  otherwise,  on  the  simple  affirmation  of  a  fallible 
fellow  creature.  Unless  his  proofs  are  fully  and  fairly  esta- 
blished on  the  Scriptures  he  professes  to  unfold,  his  assertions 
are  but  on  an  equality  with  those  of  his  opponent, — and  are  to 
be  taken  for  what  a  balance  in  the  accounts  of  either  may  ap- 
pear to  be  reasonable.  I  ask  no  more  for  the  following  pages, 
and  shall  be  perfectly  satisfied  with  the  award  of  the  reader 
whether  that  be  favourable  to,  or  opposed  to  the  opinions 
herein  advocated. 


The  Titles  of  the  Essays  are  as  follow  : 

On  the  Recognition  of  Departed  Friends  in  another  State  of 
Existence:  whether  they  have  cognizance  of  the  Affairs  of 
this  World,  and  if  so,  its  probable  Influence  on  their  Hap- 
piness in  that  State, Page  1. 

An  Attempt  to  prove  that  the  Affirmation  of  the  Descent  of 
Jesus  Christ  into  Hell — as  stated  in  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
and  asserted  in  one  of  the  Articles  of  the  Episcopal  Church, 
is  unfounded  in  Scripture — and  therefore  not  an  Article  of 
Belief,  according  to  its  own  Doctrines,         .         .     Page  34. 

Remarks  on  Phrenology — in  connexion  with  the  Soul:  and  of 
the  Existence  of  a  Soul  in  Brutes,       .        .        .     Page  50. 


CONSIDERATIONS 

On  the  Recognition  of  Departed  Friends  in  another  State 
of  Existence — a?id  whether,  in  that  State,  they  have,  or 
have  not,  Cognizance  of  the  Affairs  and  Transactions  of 
this  World;  together  icith  the  jjrobable  Influence  on  their 
Happiness,  shoidd  such  be  the  Case. 


This  subject  is  so  intimately  connected  with  that  of  the 
state  of  the  soul  after  death,  whether  it  be  in  a  quiescent  or 
active  state,  that  it  may  not  be  irrelevant  to  make  a  few  pre- 
Hminary  remarks  thereon. 

The  state  of  the  soul  after  death,  during  the  intervening  pe- 
riod of  its  separation  from  the  body,  and  that  of  the  so  called 
general  resurrection  at  the  day  of  final  judgment,  has  not 
been  the  subject  of  divine  revelation.  It  has  hence,  at  all 
times,  been  a  fruitful  theme  of  inquiry  among  the  learned, 
both  laity  and  clergy,  of  every  denomination;  nor  was  its 
consideration  neglected  by  philosophers  of  ancient  times,  even 
anterior  to  the  Christian  dispensation.  All  investigation  has, 
however,  failed  to  withdraw  the  veil  that  is  spread  between 
the  Hving  and  the  dead ;  all  is  shrouded  in  uncertainty;  and 
each  one  must  be  content  to  rest  for  its  full  elucidation  on  his 
own  experience,  at  the  close  of  his  earthly  pilgrimage! 

Such  being  the  case,  it  may  be  asked,  why  then  attempt  to 
unfold  a  mystery  on  which  God  has  thought  it  inexpedient  to 
enlighten  us?     The  question  is  probably  unanswerable;  and 

A 


1  shall  only  say  with  St.  Augustin,  as  quoted  by  Calmet, 
when  treating  on  the  difficulties  attendant  on  the  appearance 
of  angels  to  mortals,  as  to  the  nature  of  the  bodies  in  which 
they  were  seen  ;  [Enchiridion,  ch.  59,]  "  Quand  on  forme 
sur  tout  cela  desquisitions,  et  que  chacun  propose  ses  conjec- 
tures, ces  recherches  sei^vent  a  exercer  iitilement  Vesprit^ 
pourvii  qu'on  dcmeure  dans  les  termes  d'une  recherche  mo- 
deste,  et  que  Ton  ne  se  fiatte  pas  sans  raison  de  scavoir  ce  que 
Ton  ne  scait  pas.  Car  enfin  qu'est-il  necessaire  d'assurer  ou 
de  nier,  ou  de  definer  ces  sortes  de  choses,  qu'on  ne  pent  as- 
surer sans  danger,  et  qu'on  pent  ignorer  sans  peche,  et  sans 
aucun  inconvenient."  "This,"  says  Calmet,  "is  not  to  resolve 
the  difficulty,  nor  to  untie  the  knot  that  embarrasses  us;  but 
God  has  prohibited  us  from  knowing  more."* 

Without  further  apology,  I  proceed  then  to  remark,  that  if 
the  moment  of  death  is  not,  in  fact,  the  actual  commencement 
of  a  future  active  state  of  existence  to  each  individual,  and,  in 
so  far,  the  actual  and  immediate  call  to  the  judgment  seat  of 
God,  going  on  from  the  first  recorded  death  (Abel)  and 
through  all  past  ages,  progressing  still  each  day,  and  thus  to 
continue  until  time  shall  be  no  more ;  in  which  respect  it  may 
be  viewed  as  a  general,  though  progressive  judgment :  if  such 
be  not  the  fact,  then  the  inquiry  remains,  as  to  what  becomes 

""  "  It  is,"  says  Calmet,  preface,  p.  G,  "  It  is  always  shameful  to  de- 
ceive oneself,  and  it  is  hazardous  in  religion  to  believe  lightly,  or 
rashly  to  deny;  voluntarily  to  remain  in  doubt,  or  to  continue  with- 
out reason,  in  superstition  and  illusion.  It  is  therefore  important  to 
know  how  to  doubt  wisely,  and  not  extend  our  judgment  beyond  our 
knowledge."  This  is  perfectly  just,  and  should  influence  all,  in  me- 
taphysical disquisitions  especially,  to  argue  with  complacency  and 
moderation,  instead  of  employing  an  intemperate  and  sectarian  zeal 
to  prove  that  which  is  often  incapable  of  proof  in  this  world,  either  by 
reason  or  by  Scripture  itself,  which  is  too  often  pressed  into  the  ser- 
vice of  both  parties,  without  a  shadow  of  foundation  on  either  side  of 
the  disputed  point. 


of  the  soul,  when  the  link  is  broken  that  united  it  to  its  mortal 
associate?* 

If  permitted  to  form  an  opinion  on  a  subject  so  completely 
mysterious,  (and  which  must  therefore  be  altogether  hypothe- 
tical) from  the  Cew  instances  of  persons  recorded  in  Scripture, 
as  having  been  raised  from  the  dead,  the  probability  would 
seem  to  be  in  favour  of  the  sleep  or  quiescence  of  the  soul, 
rather  than  of  its  active  independent  character  immediately 
after  death.  If  separate  or  independent,  and  not  in  a  quies- 
cent state,  it  seems  extraordinary  that  not  one  of  those  raised 
from  death,  has  afforded  the  slightest  intimation  of  what  was 
exhibited  or  seen  by  them,  when  the  soul  was  soaring  at  free- 
dom, during  the  interval  between  that  event  and  its  reunion 
with  its  earthly  tenement !  That  such  actual  separation  be- 
tween the  two  does  occur,  is  fully  demonstrated  by  the  words 
of  our  Saviour  to  the  penitent  thief — "  This  day  thou  shalt  be 
with  me  in  paradise."  It  is  obvious  that  his  body  did  not 
disappear,  and  of  consequence  it  is  to  the  soul  alone  that 
reference  is  made,  and  that  it  was  to  be  apparently  in  an  ac- 
tive state.f  On  this  point  the  Bible  is  silent;  and  as  the  indi- 
vidual did  not  return  to  life,  from  him  no  information  could  be 
anticipated.  Not  so,  however,  with  the  resuscitated  corpse 
when  thrown  into  the  prophet's  grave,  who  "  revived,  and 
stood  upon  his  feet;"  2  Kings  xiii.  21:  nor  in  the  case  of  La- 
zarus, after  four  days'  sepulture,  and  commencing  putrefac- 

*  "  It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  but  after  this  the  judg- 
ment;" Heb.  ix.  27.  If  not  to  follow  inunediately  after  death,  it 
might  reasonably  be  expected  that  St.  Paul  would  give  some  insight 
as  to  the  period. 

t  So  also  Moses  (Ex.  xiv.  13)  says,  "  for  the  Egyptians  whom  ye 
have  seen  to-day,  ye  shall  see  them  again  no  more  for  ever."  Yet  in 
verse  30  it  is  stated,  "Israel  saio  the  Egyptians  cfcarf  upon  the  sea 
shore."  The  souls,  therefore,  of  the  Egyptians,  are  obviously  what 
Moses  refers  to  in  the  13th  verse. 


tion:  nor  in  those  of  the  son  of  the  widow  of  Sarepta,  of  Ta- 
bitha,  or  the  young  man  resuscitated  (if  actually  dead)  by  St. 
Paul,  or  the  child  restored  by  EHjah!  Now,  if  the  souls  of 
the  above  were  not  quiescent,  they  apparently  must  have  seen 
and  heard,  during  their  temporary  separation  from  the  body, 
in  their  spiritual  state,  something*  deserving  of  notice,  and  of 
being  described,  or  at  least  hinted  at,  for  the  edification  and 
instruction  of  friends,  when  reunited  to  the  body  and  restored 
to  life,  and  which  it  might  reasonably  be  presumed  they  would 
be  anxious  to  communicate  to  them!  Surely  the  wonders 
witnessed,  if  the  soul  was  free  and  active,  would  have  been 
the  subject  of  conversation,  and  of  deep  consideration,  far  be- 
yond any  other  conceivable  topic!  Now,  since  nothing  of 
this  kind  is  noticed,  or  even  hinted  at,  it  would  appear  to  fa- 
vour the  belief  of  the  temporary  rest  of  the  soul;  and  if  so, 
the  question  is  settled.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  may  be 
asked,  why  should  the  soul  remain  thus  inactive  and  quiescent 
(as  in  the  instance  of  that  of  Adam)  for  nearly  five  thousand 
years?  This  state  of  torpidity  must  resemble  a  continuous 
and  tranquil  sleep  of  similar  extent,  and  of  which,  when 
awaking,  he  would  be  altogether  unconscious.  This  pro- 
longed repose  would  appear  but  that  of  a  moment,  and  no  ap- 
parent reason  can  probably  be  assigned  for  a  slumber  thus 
unconscious  of  either  good  or  evil!  Does  not,  indeed,  the  ap- 
pearance of  Moses  and  EHas,  at  the  transfiguration  of  our  Sa- 
viour, altogether  prohibit  such  a  view  of  the  case,  and  nega- 
tive entirely  the  idea  of  the  quiescent  state  of  the  soul,  and 
consequently  strengthen  the  opinion  that  the  moment  of  death 
is,  in  fact,  the  instant  at  which  the  final  judgment  of  each  in- 
dividual commences?     Whichever  side  of  the  question  how- 

*  As  St.  Paul  speaks  of  being  caught  up  into  the  third  heaven, 
2  Cor.  xii.  2  :  t^itou  cv^xvou — into  paradise,  id.  v.  4  :  uc  tov  Tra^dd'ua-ov 
— whether  in  the  body,  or  out  of  the  body,  he  could  not  tell,  but  hear- 
ing unspeakable  words,  &c. 


ever  is  advocated,  difficulties  present  themselves,  which  can 
only  be  settled  by  self-experience,  at  that  awful  moment ! 

It  may  not  be  inappropriate  to  advert  here  to  that  expression 
in  the  so  called  Apostles'  Creed,  «'  I  believe  in  the  resurrection 
of  the  body.'''  This  assumed  fact  of  the  resurrection  of  the 
identical  body,  (as  most  assuredly  is  the  credence  of  ninc- 
tenths  of  all  who  repeat  it)  is  certainly  not  sustained  by  what 
St.  Paul  has  written  on  the  subject,  1  Cor.  15  ch. — nor  by 
the  Nicene  creed,  which  (as  well  as  every  part  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament) more  correctly  speaks  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 
Now,  as  this  body  is  uniformly  regarded  as  material  and  mor- 
tal, whilst  the  soul  is  affirmed  to  be  spiritual  and  immortal ;  it 
must  necessarily  follow,  that  if  the  body  is  identically  raised, 
and  becomes  thereby  a  resident  of  heaven  or  hell,  as  well  as 
the  soul ;  it  must,  by  its  existence  throughout  eternity,  be  in- 
contestably  as  immortal  as  the  soul  itself!  Those  who  accredit 
this,  must,  we  apprehend,  give  sufficient  reasons  why  St.  Paul 
says  this  vile  body  is  changed,  that  it  becomes  a  glorified,  a 
spiritual  body  ; — for,  although  the  peculiar  character  of  this 
newly  constituted  body  is  left  by  the  Apostle  altogether  unex- 
plained, yet  if  it  be  changed,  as  he  affirms  it  to  be,  then  it 
obviously  cannot  be  the  same  body.  Nor  will  it  be  found, 
that  in  any  particular,  St.  Paul  even  remotely  sanctions  such 
an  opinion. 

I  am  induced  here  to  notice  the  elaborate  and  highly  inte- 
resting work  lately  published  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  G.  Bush,  entitled 
"  Anastasis :  or  the  Doctrine  of  the  Resurrection  of  the  Body, 
rationally,  and  scripturally  considered."  I  cannot  too  highly 
express  my  opinion  of  this  important  volume  ;  it  so  completely 
subverts  the  common  belief  on  the  subject  of  that  wonderful 
and  eventful  change  in  the  destiny  of  every  human  being;  that 
it  cannot  fail  of  producing  conviction  in  the  mind  of  every  one 
who  is  capable  of  reflection  ;  and  sooner  or  later  must  lead  to 
a  change  or  modification  of  that  portion  of  the  creed,  by  which 

a2 


such  an  opinion  has  so  long  been  supposed  to  be  justified. 
Theology  and  the  world  at  large,  are  deeply  indebted  to  the 
Reverend  author  of  the  work,  for  his  patient  and  persevering 
investigation  ;  it  is  a  subject  of  congratulation  that  it  has  been 
rendered  of  general  utility  through  the  medium  of  the  press.* 

*  I  will  take  occasion  in  this  note  to  remark,  that  amongst  the 
changes  that  the  above  work  is  calculated  to  induce,  are  those  of  one 
or  two  of  the  articles  of  the  Episcopal  Church — both  of  which  are 
prominent  in  the  list — and  yet  seem  wanting  in  scriptural  authority. 
It  is  deserving  of  consideration  in  that  church,  whether,  inasmuch  as 
the  sixth  article  contains  the  foundation  of  every  part  of  its  belief, 
which  establishes  the  ''  Holy  Scriptures"  as  its  rule  of  faith, — "  So 
that  whatever  is  not  read  therein,  nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to 
be  required  of  any  man  that  it  should  be  believed,"  &c. ;  whether,  I 
repeat,  it  ought  not  therefore  to  stand  foremost  on  the  list?  it  would 
seem  to  be  its  most  appropriate  location. — The  two  articles  to  which  I 
above  refer,  are  the  3d  and  4th — the  former,  which  I  shall  more  fully 
consider  at  the  close  of  these  observations,  adverts  to  our  belief,  that 
Christ  ^'descended  into  hell."  The  latter  affirms,  that  at  his  resur- 
rection, he  '*  took  again  his  body,  with  flesh,  bones,  and  all  things  ap- 
pertaining to  the  perfection  of  man's  nature,  tohereicith  he  ascended 
into  heaven,  and  there  sittelh,  until  he  return  to  judge  all  men  at  the 
last  day." 

Is  it  really  proved  from  scripture  that  Christ  did  actually  ascend  to 
heaven,  clothed  with  flesh,  bones,  and  all  things  appertaining  to  the 
perfection  of  man's  nature,  and  that  for  a  period  of  more  than  eighteen 
hundred  years,  he  has  thus  been  located  in  a  human  form  ?  It  is  much 
to  be  questioned,  if  by  the  most  subtle  casuistry,  this  can  be  made  to 
appear !  Jesus  Christ  was  once  crucified  by  the  Jews.  They  were 
mostly  ignorant  of  the  crime  that  they  committed,  for  Christ  himself 
says,  whilst  on  the  cross,  "  Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not 
what  they  do."  After  his  death,  an  honourable  burial  was  permitted 
to  his  corpse,  and,  save  the  wound  in  his  side,  by  a  Roman  soldier, 
no  mutilation  was  inflicted  on  his  corpse.  Catholics,  more  savage 
than  the  Jews,  like  cannibals,  daily  devour  him  alive,  and  so  have  done 
for  many  centuries  !  How  many  millions  of  times  this  unholy  act  has 
been  performed,  might  perhaps,  be  made  with  profit  the  subject  of 
calculation,  which,  though  incapable  of  absolute  precision,  would  still 


In  cursorily  treating  this  subject,  (so  much  more  fully  and 
elaborately  considered  in  the  work  alluded  to,)  I  shall  venture 
to  surmise,  that  the  reformers  of  our  liturgy,  pious  and  excel- 
lent as  the}^  were,  and  deserving  of  the  warmest  praise  of  every 
Protestant;  in  establishing  a  set  of  articles  of  religion  for  us, 
were  yet  but  imperfectly  acquainted  with  some  important 
branches  of  medical  and  physical  science,  that  if  better  under- 
stood, might  greatly  have  assisted  their  theological  investiga- 
tions. Anatomy,  Physiology  and  Chemistry  were  then  in  their 
infancy;  but  even  of  what  was  known,  they  appear  to  have 
been  very  ignorant,  if  we  may  judge  of  their  information  from 
various  parts  of  their  writings.  A  superior  degree  of  know- 
ledge at  the  present  period  of  the  world,  might  be  appropriately 
employed  to  rectify  some  of  their  errors,  as  they  rectified  many 
of  the  Romish  church  ; — and  our  faith,  by  their  own  showing, 
is  no  more  dependant  on  their  opinions,  when  not  in  harmony 
with  scripture,  than  they  themselves  judged  to  be  the  case  with 
the  fathers  who  preceded  them,  under  similar  circumstances ; 
or  we  never  should  have  witnessed  the  glorious  influence  of  the 


suffice  to  show  how  often  they  have  crucified  the  Lord  of  Life,  and 
thereby  put  him  to  open  shame.  The  Jews  were  satisfied  by  once  de- 
priving him  of  life  by  a  cruel,  but  not  uncommon  death — but  Roman- 
ists devour  him  alive,  flesh,  bones  and  all;  they  do  not  sacrifice  him, 
but  eat  him  bodily.  Both  alike  act  from  ignorance,  and  may  our  Sa- 
viour pray  for  these,  as  he  did  for  the  Jews,  "Father,  forgive  them, 
for  they  know  not  what  they  do  !" 

But  is  this  body  of  our  Saviour,  tJiat  is  represented  as  being  in 
heaven,  (with  every  thing  appertaining  to /«</nrt/i  nature)  truly  proved 
to  be  the  same  which  appeared  on  earth,  by  any  part  of  scripture,  or 
is  it  not  rather  "  a  fond  thing  vainly  invented,  and  grounded  upon  no 
warranty  of  scripture,  but  rather  repugnant  to  the  word  of  God.?" 
Although,  to  be  sure,  the  Papists  in  number  throughout  the  world, 
about  two  hundred  millions,  do  at  least  bring  him  down  from  heaven, 
half  that  number  of  times  dailtj,  to  be  craunched  alive  between  their 
merciless  jaws  ! — Gredat  Judffius  ! 


8 

reformation,  but  should  still  have  been  "in  the  gall  of  bitter- 
ness, and  in  the  bonds  of  iniquity." 

A  question  occurs  here,  if  the  identical  body  committed  to 
the  grave,  is  that  which  arises  to  judgment,  whether  it  is  to  be 
punished  or  rewarded,  for  deeds  done  at  an  anterior  state  of 
existence ;  since  it  is  obvious  to  every  one,  that  the  particles 
of  matter  which  composed  it  in  the  heyday  of  youth,  when 
sins  of  most  kinds  more  generally  prevail,  are  not  those  that 
constitute  it  at  the  age  of  sixty  or  seventy.* 

*  If  all  the  particles  of  matter  that  at  the  different  periods  of  life 
have  constituted  a  portion  of  our  frame  shouki  be  raised,  (and  we  may 
ask  what  greater  claim  has  the  last  particle  deposited  over  those  which 
constituted  the  first  rudiments  of  the  body,  though  long  since  removed, 
except  on  the  principle  that  possession  is  nine  points  of  the  law,  I 
cannot  well  perceive,  especially  as  it  may  be  controverted  by  another, 
seniores,  priores .')  then  consider  what  gigantic  bodies  must  appear! 
I  have  somewhere  seen  a  calculation  of  the  amount  eaten  during  the 
life  time  of  an  individual,  estimated  by  an  equivalent  of  such  a  number 
of  sheep;  which  is  made  to  amount,  I  think,  to  four  thousand.  A 
goodly  amount  of  mortality  to  invest  the  soul !  But  this  is  only  for  a 
longevity  of  present  times.  If  we  go  back  to  the  antediluvians,  who 
lived  ten  or  twelve  times  as  long;  the  amount  will  reach  to  forty  or 
fifty  thousand  !  Some,  however,  have  supposed,  that  big  or  little 
young  or  old,  all  will  rise  with  bodies  of  about  thirty-three  years  of 
apparent  age;  being  that  of  our  Saviour  at  the  period  of  his  death, 
and  in  the  perfect  forms  of  men  and  women.  St.  Augustin,  who  knew 
as  much  of  this  matter  as  any  one.  Is  full  authority  for  this,  as  well  as 
for  some  further  information  he  affords  us,  viz:  that  "  Erunt  autem 
tunc  membra  fceminea;  non  accomodata  usui  veteri,  sed  decori  novo; 
quo  non  alliciatur  aspicientis  concupiscentia,  qua?  nulla  erit,"  &c. 

"  Our  doctors  say  (Sterne's  Koran,  p.  118,)  that  the  dead  siiall  rise 
again  with  bodies.  This  notion  appears  to  be  an  article  of  faith  agreea- 
ble rather  to  the  doctrine  of  a  Mahometan  priest,  than  a  Christian  di- 
vine. It  would  be  unphilosophic  to  suppose,  that  flesh  and  blood  shall 
lose  their  properties  after  resurrection." — Many  anxious  inquirers  also 
seek  to  know  further,  whether  those  parts  that  are  here  deemed  orna- 
mental, such  as  the  hair  of  the  head,  will  rise  with  the  body,  inasmuch 
as  it  will  be  so  very  long;  as  well  as  the  nails.     St.  Augustin  comforts 


Whatever  the  sins  of  old  age  may  be,  and  for  which  pu- 
nishment is  justly  due,  surely  the  justice  of  a  gracious  and 
heavenly  father,  would  never  condemn  the  materials  of  old  age, 
that  had  never  committed  the  sins  which  had  prevailed  in  youth. 
Now,  is  not  perpetual  change  evinced,  by  the  absolute  neces- 
sity of  our  daily  food  for  which  we  petition  "our  Father  who 
is  in  heaven  ?"  If  such  were  not  the  fact,  what  necessity  would 
there  be  of  this  frequent  recurrence  to  food  of  any  kind  ?  and 
why  would  not  the  same  particles  of  matter  fully  answer  every 
intention  when  we  had  reached  our  full  complement  of  growth? 
But  no  !  each  particle  performs  its  respective  duty,  and  succes- 
sively yields  its  place  to  a  new  one,  and  is  thrown  off  as  effete 
and  useless,  if  not  absolutely  injurious  to  the  system  of  which 
it  had  constituted  a  part.* 

them  by  the  assurance  that  every  superfluity  will  be  removed,  and 
every  deficiency  supplied.  It  is  surprising  that  these  minute  philoso- 
phers did  not  carry  their  inquiries  into  the  matter  of  the  dtindrifF  of  the 
hair,  and  other  sordes  of  the  animal  economy,  all  of  which  once  formed 
a  part  of  its  substance,  and  is  equally  entitled  to  their  respectful  con- 
sideration as  those  they  have  taken  pains  to  look  after. 

The  rib  of  which  Eve  was  formed  has  puzzled  them  very  greatly  ; 
having  been  first  vivified  in  Adam,  he  seems  to  have  a  prior  claim — 
and  it  became  highly  important  to  know  to  which  of  the  two  it  will 
appertain  in  heaven  !  If  Adam,  as  its  first  proprietor,  demands  it  as 
his  property,  what  becomes  of  Eve  ?  It  is  replied,  that  it  was  primarily 
ordained  for  Eve,  and  not  for  the  perfecting  of  Adam  ;  in  whom  it  was 
a  mere  superfluity,  or  else  its  place  in  him  filled  up  with  flesh  !  In 
like  manner,  abortions  and  monsters,  'tis  aftirmed,  will  be  rendered 
perfect !  And  now,  after  all  this  fanciful  and  ridiculous  speculation  of 
learned  saints  and  theologians,  how  will  it  comport  with  the  direct 
affirmation  of  the  resurrection  of  the  identical  body  that  has  rotted  in 
the  grave  ? 

*  It  appears  to  me  a  most  extraordinary  circumstance  that  tiie  doc- 
trine of  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  should  have  ever  entered  into 
the  mind  of  any  one  who  reads  the  scripture  with  due  attention,  and 
that  it  should  continue  even  to  this  period  ;  when  the  very  next  chap- 
ter of  Genesis  to  that  which  describes  the  creation  of  man  "  of  the 


10 

The  learned  and  Reverend  Father  Dom.  Aug.  Cahnet,  has 
left  among  his  writings,  one,  entitled  "  Dissertations  sur  les 
Apparitions  des  Anges,  des  Demons  and  des  Esprits,"  &c. 
Paris,  1746,  12mo.  In  the  67th,  p.  230,  and  succeeding  chap- 
ters, he  points  out  the  difficulty  of  explaining  apparitions  on 
the  hypothesis  that  souls,  angels,  &c.  are  purely  spiritual,  and 
after  giving  strong  arguments  against  the  materiality  of  the 
soul,  in  opposition  to  Locke, — yet  he  in  a  measure  admits  the 
possibility  (as  every  one  must  do)  under  the  power  of  God. 
"A  Dieu  ne  plaise  que  nous  voulions  donner  des  bornes  a  la 
Toute-Puissance  de  Dieu," — although  he  adds  that  our  mind 
sees  no  proportion  between  these  two  things,  thought  and  mat- 
ter;— admitting  that  the  subject  is  not  known  to  us  by  revela- 
tion ;  nor  is  it  demonstrated  either  by  the  cause  or  its  effects,— 
and  he  agrees  that  difficulties  environ  whichever  system  is 
adopted. 

Such  is  the  conclusion  that  all  must  arrive  at — and  that 
neither  opinion  is  capable  of  absolute  demonstration,  or  it 
must  long  since  have  been  finally  settled.  Were  it  a  point  of 
revelation,  then  it  would  be  conclusive,  and  a  matter  of  faith 
alone;  but  as  a  metaphysical  object,  it  may  admit  of  specula- 
tion, without  calling  forth  the  angry  feelings  of  opposing  theo- 
rists, who,  without  any  scruples  of  Christian  charity,  condemn 

dust  of  the  ground,"  describes  also  his  corporeal  destruction  "  till 
thou  return  unto  the  ground  ;  for  out  of  it  wast  thou  taken  :  for  dust 
thou  art  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return.'^  Can  aught  be  more  explicit — 
or  can  any  theologian,  even  if  equalling  the  most  subtle  of  the  school- 
men, find  here  the  slightest  support  for  a  doctrine  so  evidently  opposed 
to  scripture  and  to  true  philosophy  !  Wlien  it  is  said  that  Adam  was 
made  of  the  dust  of  the  earth,  it  is  not  to  be  taken  in  its  strict  and 
literal  meaning — but  that  he  was  formed  from  those  ehmcntary  prin- 
ciples, of  which  the  universe  is  constituted,  and  into  which  the  body 
is  again  resolved  after  death,  through  the  process  of  putrefaction ; 
thereby  escaping  into  the  general  mass,  to  aid  in  the  building  up  of 
new  forms  of  matter,  animal,  vegetable  and  mineral. 


11 

one  another  to  anathema,  excommunication  and  death.  Ob« 
loquy  and  persecution  are  not  the  certain  characteristics  of 
truth;  and  here  it  is  easily  seen  that  feeble  reason  can  afford 
but  little  help  to  harmonize  or  settle,  that  which  God  has  not 
thought  fit  to  reveal  to  man.  The  deep  mystery  of  the  nature 
of  the  soul  cannot  be  discovered  by  these  contending  oppo- 
nents; but  after  all  their  vain  attempts,  must  leave  it  for  a 
final  settlement  in  another  world,  when,  should  they  meet  and 
recognise  each  other,  it  is  probable  that  they  may  decide  it 
with  more  harmony  than  they  ever  enjoyed  in  their  sublunary 
discussions.* 

To  recur,  however,  to  Calmet,  he  gives  at  page  411,  et  seq. 
sundry  instances  from  St.  Augustin,  from  his  treatise,  "De 
Civitate  Dei,"  of  persons  "renvoyes  au  monde,"  and  then 
proceeds  as  follows : — 

"  St.  Augustin  demande  ensuite  si  les  morts  ont  connois- 
sance  de  ce  qui  se  passe  en  cette  vie?  II  montre  que  non: 
parceque  Dieu  a  retire  du  monde,  par  example,  Josias  (2 
Chron.  xxxiv.  28)  a  fin  qu'il  ne  fut  pas  temoin  des  maux  qui 
devoient  arriver  a  sa  nation ;  et  que  nous  disons  tous  les  jours, 
qu'un  tel  est  heureux  d'etre  sorti  du  monde  pour  ne  pas  res- 
sentir  les  maux  qui  sent  arrives  a  sa  famille,  ou  a  sa  patrie." 

It  is  certain,  as  experience  proves,  that  much  can  and  has 
been  said  on  both  sides  of  the  above  question,  as  asked  by  St. 
Augustin.  Agreeing  with  him  fully  in  the  negation  assumed 
by  him,  I  consider  it,  nevertheless,  as  incapable  of  absolute 
proof,  as  I  consider  all  that  has  been  said  or  written  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  soul  itself.     Still,  I  shall  venture  to  make  a  few 

*  ''  Is  it  not  an  amazing  thing  (vide  Koran,  p.  174,  ascribed  to 
Sterne)  that  men  shall  attempt  to  investigate  the  mystery  of  tlie  re- 
demption, when,  at  the  same  time  that  it  is  propounded  to  us  as  an 
article  of  faith  solely,  we  are  told  that  the  very  angels  have  desired 
to  pry  into  it  in  vain?"  Will  not  this  remark  as  aptly  apply  to  the 
never-ending  disputes  as  to  the  nature  and  character  of  the  soul  ? 


12 

remarks  on  the  subject,  since  it  has  a  strong  bearing  on  the 
views  we  may  entertain  as  to  the  felicity  which  the  good  may 
be  presumed  to  enjoy  in  a  future  state! 

I  must  here  remark,  that  although  persuaded  of  the  truth  x)f 
the  opinion  given  by  this  great  man  on  the  subject  under  con- 
sideration, that  it  is  reported  of  him,  that  he  "  said  he  behoved 
some  things,  because  they  were  absurd  and  impossible" 
(Sterne's  Koran,  p.  81):  and  that  this  is  an  undoubted  trait 
in  his  character,  will  be  best  exhibited  from  his  own  autho- 
rity,* coupled  with  that  of  his  attendant  presbyters,  if,  indeed, 
a  more  obnoxious  term  could  not  be  appropriately  applied  to 
the  information  to  which  he  has  ventured  to  give  publicity. 

A  curious  work  printed  at  Leipsic  in  1744,  entitled  "  His- 
toria  Crypto-Socinismi,  Altorfina3  quondam  Academise  infesti, 
Arcana,"  by  G.  G.  Zeltnerus,  has  a  part  of  it  occupied,  under 
the  head  of  "  Supplementa  et  Documenta,"  and  divided  into 
several  chapters,  the  eighth  of  which  is  headed,  "Confessio 
Fidei  Joachimi  Peuschelii,"  &c.,  consisting  of  his  answers  to 
twelve  questions  respecting  sundry  points  of  religion.  One  of 
those  questions,  p.  998,  is — "An  utraque  symbola,  Nicenum 
et  Athanasii,  sacris  litteris  in  omnibus  sint  conformia?"  The 
reply  follows,  accompanied  by  notes  and  references,  many  in- 
teresting, and  bearing  more  or  less  on  different  particulars  of 
those  creeds,  some  not  undeserving  of  attention.     The  latter 

*  In  his  "  Sermones  ad  Fratres  in  Eremo,"  is  one  (at  p.  17,  Sermo 
37th,  Paris  cd.  of  151G,  black  letter)  in  which  he  says,  "  Ecce  ego  jam 
Episcopus  Ilipponensis  eram,  et  cum  quibusdam  servis  Christi  ad 
iEthiopiam  perrexi,  ut  eis  sanctum  Christi  Evangelium  prredicarem  ; 
et  videmus  ibi  multos  homines  et  mulieres,  capita  non  hahentcs!  sed 
oculos  grosses  Jixos  in  pecfore!  Csetera  membra  cequalia  nobis  ha- 
bentes."  And  a  few  lines  further  on  he  adds,  '^Videmus  et  in  infe- 
rioribus  partibus  iEthiopise,  homines  unum  oculum  tantum  in  fronte 
habentes."  Who  can  pretend  to  harbour  a  doubt  in  his  mind  of  so 
wonderful  a  fact,  when  given  under  the  immediate  sanction  of  the 
greatest  saint  in  the  Romish  church  ! 


13 

creed  has  happily  been  expunged  from  the  Liturgy  of  the 
American  Episcopal  Church,  yet  it  still  deforms  that  of  the 
parent  church  of  England!* 

At  p.  1032  are  the  following  questions: — 

"An  in  Christo  Domino  nostro  jam  in  statu  gloria:,  vera  sit 
humanitas,  secundum  quam  veram  carnem  et  sanguincm  (Ro- 
manists are  speaking)  quoe  in  ccena  participamus,  habeat? 
Item:  Annon  Photinianum  argumentum,  caro  et  sanguis  reg- 
num  Dei  non  possidebunt.  Ergo,  quia  Christus  sit  jam  in 
regno  Dei,  eum  non  habere  carnem  et  sanguinem:  sit  purum 
sophisma,  et  quid  respondendum?" 

Peuschelius  replies,  taking,  as  his  text,  v.  12,  13,  of  6th 
chapter  of  St.  Paul's  2d  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians — "  Meats 
for  the  belly,  and  the  belly  for  meats;  but  God  shall  destroy 
both  it  and  them."  The  respondent  lays  great  stress  on 
"God  shall  destroy  both  it  and  them,"  and  then  pertinently 
asks,  "  Quomodo  vero  hoc  convenit  cum  eo,  quod  vulgo  aiunt, 
idem  numero  corpus  cum  omnibus  suis  membris  resurrectu- 
rum?  An  datur  corpus  absque  ventre?"  This,  by  the  pious 
examiners,  is  called  "  Ineptise,"  because  the  apostle  speaks  not 
alone  of  the  belly,  but  of  its  operations  on  the  food,  which  will 
not  take  place  in  another  life,  &c.     The  respondent,  no  way 

*  In  the  Analytical  Review  (London,  1789,  3d  Vol.  p.  288)  are  some 
good  remarks  upon  the  subject  of  a  reform  of  the  Liturgy,  in  which 
reference  is  made  to  the  reform  of  that  of  the  American  Episcopal 
Church,  and  at  p.  294,  that  Liturgy,  with  its  revision  is  briefly  no- 
ticed,  and  it  is  there  stated,  that  "The  restoration  of  the  Athanasian 
creed  was  also  proposed  to  that  Convention  (that  at  Delaware  in 
1786)  at  the  instance  of  the  letter  from  the  English  archbishops,  but 
was  rejected.  And,  indeed,  the  compliance  of  the  Convention  in  the 
other  instances,  (respecting  the  descent  of  Christ  into  hell  in  the 
Apostle's  creed,  &c.,  which  had  been  omitted,  but  subsequently  re- 
stored) was  the  price  to  be  paid  for  the  consecration  of  their  bishops 
in  England;  but  the  conditions  of  the  purchase  reflect  no  honour 
upon  either  of  the  contracting  parties  !" 

B 


14 

daunted,  proceeds  thus:  "Vel,  an  venter,  et  ece,  quarum  re- 
ceptaculum  est,  partes,  velut  cor,  pulmo,  jecur,  lien,  sto- 
machus,  &c.,  non  sunt  de  corporis  essentia,  vel  ejus  partes 
aut  essentiales,  aut  integrales?  Imo  monstrum  potius  corporis 
humani,  vel  corpus  phantasticum  et  marcioniticum,  quam  ve- 
rum  corpus  censendum,  quod  ventre  caret.  Et  dempto  ac 
abolito  ventre,  quid  reliquis  membris  fiet?  an  et  ilia  abolebun- 
tur?  Sic  sane  persuasum  mihi  habeo.  Aut,  si  manebunt, 
quomodo  ilia  inter  se  cohserebunt  et  jungentur?  Mirabilis 
sane  homo,  qui  manibus,  pedibus,  auribus,  oculis,  capite,  &c., 
prseditus,  ventre  tamen  caret," — Much  more  is  argued  to 
the  same  effect,  with  observations  on  St.  Paul's  exposition  of 
the  modification  of  the  body  in  the  resurrection,  not  devoid  of 
interest  in  considering  this  important  doctrine,  which  we  are 
taught  in  infancy,  and  continue  up  to  the  latest  period  of  life 
to  repeat  it  like  parrots,  without  duly  reflecting  on  its  intrinsic 
nature.* 

If  those  who  depart  this  life  may  be  supposed  to  have  any 
further  acquaintance  with  what  passes  in  the  world,  we  should 
reasonably  imagine,  that  numerous  instances  of  depravity,  to- 
getlier  with  the  generally  associated  misery  of  their  immediate 
friends  and  relatives  left  behind  them,  being  perpetually  pre- 
sented to  their  observation,  would  (if  their  feelings  and  affec- 
tions at  all  resemble  those  they  here  possessed)  inevitably  tend 
to  diminish,  if  not  to  extinguish,  the  felicity  that  we  usually 
attach  to  their  heavenly  existence!  Let  each  one  represent  to 
himself  the  parents  of  a  large  family  (his  own  for  instance), 
removed  by  death,  and  participating  in  the  blissful  enjoyments 


*  If  the  resurrection  body  is  a  spiritual  and  glorified  one,  as  St. 
Paul  affirms,  the  organs  of  the  material  body,  as  here  existing,  cannot 
come  into  operation,  and,  consequently,  recognition  must  be  fiounded 
on  principles  of  a  very  different  character  from  those  which  are  re- 
quired in  this  world. 


15 

of  heaven.  Imagine,  now,  those  parents  looking  from  their 
blest  abode,  and  tracing,  day  by  day,  the  footsteps  of  their 
beloved  offspring  in  the  paths  of  vice,  and  conscious  of  their 
complete  secession  from  virtue;  and  assured  thereby  of  not 
being  able  to  welcome  them,  and  reunite  with  them  in  those 
mansions  of  eternal  happiness!  But  could  those  parents  in- 
deed feel  happiness,  even  within  the  precincts  of  paradise? — 
Let  each  one  answer :  could  aught  but  unutterable  anguish 
be  their  portion? 

Now  can  we  for  an  instant  accredit  that  the  felicity  of  hea- 
ven is  subjected  to  such  alloy!  an  alloy  incompatible  with 
every  idea  the  mind  can  form  to  itself:  it  seems  impossible, 
incongruous,  and  inconsistent  with  the  doctrine  taught  us  by 
the  Scriptures!  Either,  then,  the  feelings  must  differ,  and  be 
entirely  changed  from  those  experienced  on  earth;  all  me- 
mory of  sublunary  things  must  be  obliterated;  or  all  know- 
ledge of  what  is  passing  upon  earth  must  be  precluded.  This 
last  supposition  involves  the  overthrow  of  every  idea  of  inter- 
course with  the  events  of  our  globe,  either  of  a  general  or  of  a 
partial  nature! 

I  perceive  but  one  way  to  reconcile  this  apparent  anomaly, 
and  obviate  the  dilemma  which  appears  to  attach  to  either  side 
of  the  question,  or  which  may  afford  a  probable  explanation  of 
what  is  in  itself  so  obscure  and  mysterious. 

In  the  creation  of  every  individual,  no  doubt  exists,  that, 
whatever  be  its  nature,  an  immortal^  tenant  is  also  created, 


■  *  We  may  be  here  permitted  to  observe,  that,  independently  of  the 
will  of  its  Almighty  architect,  the  soul  is  (necessarily)  neither  immor- 
tal nor  eternal.  The  soul  of  the  embryo  or  infant  in  utero,  apparently 
must,  as  emanating  from  God,  be  on  an  equality  with  that  of  the  most 
gifted  and  accomplished  adult;  but  the  organs  by  which,  or  through 
which  its  faculties  can  alone  be  fully  developed,  being  as  yet  imper- 
fect or  unformed,  and  only  reaching  perfection  after  a  period  of  many 
years,  its  faculties  can  show  themselves  only  in  the  ratio  in  which  the 


16 

pari-passii,  to  occupy  the  body  whilst  vitality  exists!  God 
has,  in  his  wisdom,  thought  proper  to  withhold  from  us  all 
knowledge  of  its  character  and  composition ;  and  beyond  the 
assurance  of  its  continued  existence  we  know  nothing,  when 
its  earthly  associate  has  mouldered  into  dust,  and  through  the 
agency  of  chemical  laws  been  decomposed  into  its  primitive 
elements,  and  passed  into  other  forms  of  matter,  to  subserve 
still  further  the  operations  of  the  animal,  vegetable,  or  mineral 
kingdom!  Those  particles  of  matter  which  constituted  the 
persons  of  our  first  parents,  have  thus  continued  to  float  along 
the  tide  of  time,  and  still  continue  to  exist  under  diversified 
forms,  claiming  thereby  affinity  to  all,  yet  not  admitting  of  the 
absolute  control  of  any !  In  evidence  that  tne  Great  Being, 
who  formed  the  soul  for  immortality,  can,  at  his  pleasure, 
prove  that  it  is  not  so,  necessarily,  our  gracious  Saviour 
warns  us  "to  fear  him  who  can  destroy  both  soul  and  body 
in  hell."  Whatever  the  expression  may  absolutely  indicate, 
yet  being  coupled  with  the  body,  it  would  seem  to  apply  to 
something  of  a  material  character,  though  it  need  not  be  con- 
sidered as  of  any  of  the  elementary  matter  of  our  globe ;  the 
destruction  of  the  body,  as  material,  we  can  comprehend,  by 
annihilation  or  otherwise;  but  what  can  we  conceive  of  the 
destruction  of  immateriality? 

Be  all  this  as  it  may,  we  are  led  to  believe,  that  the  soul, 
clothed  in  a  spiritual  and  glorified  body,  altogether  distinct 
from  its  former  associate,  is  the  only  part  of  man  that  finds  a 

improvement  of  the  organs?  takes  place.  "  When  I  was  a  child,"  says 
St.  Paul,  *'  I  spake  as  a  child,  &c.,  but  when  I  became  a  man,  I  put 
away  childish  things."  Even  oiar  Saviour  is  said  to  have  "  increased 
in  wisdom  and  stature,"  &c.  On  the  same  principles  we  may  rea- 
sonably conjecture  that  the  soul  of  the  idiot  or  of  the  insane,  is,  quo 
ad  the  soul,  perfect;  but  its  actions  bein_g  developed  through  the  me- 
dium of  imperfect  or  diseased  organization,  those  actions  will  deviate 
in  a  similar  ratio  from  the  perfect  and  proper  standard. 


17 

passage  to  the  region  of  heaven  !  Now,  when  thus  unshackled 
by  the  fetters  of  mortality,  and  it  returns  to  its  Creator,  it 
may  not  unreasonably  be  concluded,  that  being  no  longer  con- 
trolled by  flesh  and  blood,  this  divine  emanation  loses  its  former 
feelings  and  impressions,  arising  from  its  previous  necessary 
dependence  on  corporeal  organs  of  sense  for  all  its  former  in- 
tercourse with  the  material  world,  but  which  now  no  longer 
appertain  to  it  in  its  new  and  separate  state  of  being ! 

If  the  usual  means  of  communication  (here  essential  to  our 
welfare)  are  cut  ofi",  it  follows  that  some  new  measure  must  be 
provided  for  its  spiritual  state,  whether  that  be  limited  to  heaven 
or  extended  to  the  earth,  since  that  which  previously  existed, 
is  now,  as  though  it  had  never  been  !  The  spirits  of  the  just 
made  perfect,  associated  together  in  one  blessed  community, 
and  constituting  one  great  and  extensive  family  of  love  in 
heaven,*  must  feel  now  impulses  and  trains  of  impressions, 
enlarged  and  expanded  as  the  place  they  inhabit ;  forming  there 
a  different  state  of  society  from  that  limited  connexion  which 
bound  them  on  earth  !|  Their  feelings  are  no  longer  earthly. 
With  this  world  having  no  longer  any  concern,  they  must  have 
attained  celestial  feelings,  for  how  can  it  be  imagined  that 

*  The  views  of  the  society  of  heaven,  as  described  by  Swedenborg, 
although  ihey  may  be  considered  as  highly  fanciful,  are  nevertheless 
extremely  beautiful. 

t  The  extensive  circle  of  each  one's  connexions  and  associations  in 
this  world,  are  pretty  accurately  defined  by  Sterne  in  the  7th  ch.  of 
Tristram  Shandy,  when  speaking  of  the  "notable  good  old  body  of  a 
midwife" — ''  who  had  acquired,  in  her  way,  no  small  degree  of  repu- 
tation in  the  world,"  he  adds  "by  the  word  icorld,  need  I  in  this  place 
inform  your  worship  that  I  would  be  understood  to  mean  no  more  of 
it,  than  a  small  circle  described  upon  the  circle  of  the  great  world,  of 
four  English  miles  diameter,  or  thereabouts,  of  which  the  cottage 
where  the  good  old  woman  lived  is  supposed  to  be  tlie  centre,"  And 
such  is  tlje  magnitude  of  the  world  of  the  greater  proportion  of  tho 
human  race  ! 

b2 


18 

earthly  cares  and  thoughts  can  predominate,  when  all  the  ma- 
terial organs  of  the  body  ceased  their  functions  at  the  cessa- 
tion of  vitality,  and  now  are  mouldering  in  the  grave? 

Should  these  blessed  spirits  then  be  permitted  to  revisit  the 
earth,  their  feelings  must  be  of  a  general,  not  of  a  limited  or 
partial  character.  Were  it  otherwise,  and  former  feelings  still 
predominate,  existence  even  in  heaven  would,  according  to  our 
present  conception,  apparently  be  accompanied  with  all  those 
partial  attachments  and  regards,  that  constitute  on  earth,  the 
great  bond  of  consanguinity,  and  form  the  most  important 
principle  of  domestic  love  and  friendship !  But  would  not  the 
happiness  of  heaven  be  thereby  frustrated  ?  Would  not  simi- 
lar cliques  and  coteries  of  families,  of  friends,  and  family  con- 
nexions, be  equally  there  constituted  under  the  feelings  of 
mortality?  and  would  not,  therefore,  feuds  and  friendships  ne- 
cessarily ensue  as  on  earth,  to  the  diminution  or  to  a  total  ex- 
tinction of  that  celestial  affection,  which  it  may  be  presumed 
was  the  intention  of  a  gracious  Being,  their  common  parent,  for 
the  happiness  of  all?  However  it  may  here  be  requisite  to 
possess  both  love  and  friendship  for  our  immediate  families  and 
relations ;  a  necessity  obviously  essential  to  this  state  of  exist- 
ence, and  therefore  so  wisely  ordained  by  God  himself  for 
mutual  comfort  and  support  amidst  the  trials  of  this  life;  it 
seems  well  calculated  to  subvert  the  happiness  of  heaven ! 
We  are,  therefore,  irresistibly  led  to  the  conclusion,  that  a  like 
necessity  no  longer  existing  after  death,  a  new  train  of  feelings 
is  awakened,  under  the  spiritual  influence  of  the  disembodied 
being !  Partial,  parental,  filial  and  consanguineous,  are  ob- 
literated with  the  obliteration  of  the  corporeal  organization  to 
which  they  were  essential,  and  yield  to  the  influence  of  general 
love  and  universal  affection.  Should  we  then  happily  attain 
those  blessed  mansions,  is  it  not  both  probable  and  reasonable, 
that  we  shall  there,  no  longer  recognise  each  other  as  we  do 
at  present,  in  the  various  relations  of  parent,  husband,  wife  or 


19 

child,  or  other  family  or  civil  connexion?  but  that  we  shall  all 
meet  as  one  great  family,  in  which  is  lost  the  memory  of  those 
more  limited  and  circumscribed  tiesof  earthly  affection  ?  Has 
not  our  Saviour  taught  us  that  in  heaven,  there  is  neither  mar- 
riage nor  giving  in  marriage  ?  and  may  this  not  be  regarded 
justly,  as  an  indirect  acknowledgment  of  the  truth  of  the  above 
assumed  position  ?  Of  what  utility  indeed  could  marriage  be 
in  heaven  ?  Of  its  absolute  necessity  on  earth,  no  one  can 
have  a  doubt,  except  a  Romish  Priest  !*  Lotus  for  an  instant 
admit  that  the  feelings  and  affections  of  this  mortal  state  are 
carried  into  heaven  ;  and  what  would  be  the  result  ?  Here, 
during  the  short  period  of  fifty  or  one  hundred  years,  a  pe- 
riod less  than  a  speck  in  the  lengthened  chain  of  never  ceasing 
ages ; — here,  even  in  the  best  regulated  and  most  affectionate 
families,  how  frequent  are  the  evidences  of  temporary  forget- 
fulness  of  love  and  sympathy,  in  the  little  bickerings  and  dis- 
putes on  mere  trifling  subjects  of  different  opinions,  imagined 
affronts,  or  pecuniary  matters !  How  would  these  comport 
with  the  happiness  anticipated  of  a  never-ending  eternity?  But 
must  not  such  result  from  mortal  feelings — and  what  becomes 
of  heaven? 

Repugnant  as  at  first  sight  such  views  may  prove  to  mun- 
dane ideas,  reflection  will  probably  reconcile  them  to  the  mind, 
and  convince  it  that  happiness  in  heaven  must  prove  imper- 
fect, if  shackled  by  the  memory  of  past  events,  and  worldly 
transactions  of  persons  and  things.  Family,  religious,  and 
national  associations  would  continue  to  maintain  their  limited 
and  sectarian  affections  and  hatred,  to  the  exclusion  of  that 
expansive  benevolence  which  kindred  spirits  can  alone  enjoy. 

*  And  why  ?  Because  he  can  revel  in  the  dehghts  of  concupiscence, 

-  unshackled  by  the  ties  and  responsibihties  of  parental  affinity.     See  on 

the  subject  of  priestly  celibacy,  a  small  but  excellent  treatise  by  the 

Right  Rev.  Diogo  Antonio  Feijo,  of  Brazil,  "  On   the   Necessity  of 

Abolishing  a  Constrained  Clerical  Celibacy,"  &c.     . 


20 

Is  this  indeed  an  inconsistent  view  of  the  subject  under  con- 
sideration, when  we  remember,  (what  all  admit)  that  we  have 
one  common  origin  in  Adam ;  and  are,  therefore,  merely  indi- 
vidual, though  distant  links  of  one  great  chain  proceeding  from 
him,  and  ending  only  with  the  termination  of  the  human 
family !  Brethren  we  are  in  fact,  both  spiritually  and  cor- 
poreally, and  hence  the  great  command,  that  we  should  love 
each  other  as  ourselves — which,  although  of  the  utmost  diffi- 
culty in  this  life,  may  readily  be  imagined  to  be  the  case  in 
heaven,  if  free  from  the  shackles  of  this  mortal  state !  The 
former,  constituted  by  our  souls,  all  alike  emanating  from  a 
benevolent  and  heavenly  parent;  the  latter,  deriving  its  source 
from  the  earthly  father  of  the  w  hole  human  race.  The  chain 
indeed  is  rusty,  even  from  its  commencement !  The  fall  of 
Adam,  the  murder  of  Abel,  speedily  tarnished  its  original 
lustre,  and  wars,  persecutions,  and  all  the  varied  ills  which 
spring  from  the  unrestrained  passions  of  man,  have  continued 
to  disfigure  it  to  the  present  day!  What  a  most  felicitous 
progeny  in  corporeal  identity  to  meet  in  heaven ! 

I  come  then  to  the  conclusion,  that  by  the  above,  or  by  some 
analogous  view',  we  can  alone,  I  think,  explain,  how  heavenly 
spirits,  if  permitted  to  investigate  and  watch  over  the  affairs  of 
man,  may  yet  continue  happy,  and  be  altogether  insensible  to 
the  misery  that  would  otherwise  await  them,  under  the  influ- 
ence of  memory  of  passed  and  passing  events  !  Whether  my 
readers  shall  arrive  at  the  same  conclusion,  I  cannot  prophesy ; 
but  I  \\'\\\  merely  notice  in  addition  for  their  consideration, 
that  it  is  perfectly  obvious,  we  all  care  as  little  here  for  our 
predecessors  of  the  fourth,  fifth  and  sixth  generation,  and  so 
on,  counting  back  to  Adam,  as  we  do  for  those  who  are  to 
succeed  us  to  the  end  of  the  world.  Beyond  the  ^ew  dear  ob- 
jects of  affection,  immediately  known  to  us,  all  are  relatively 
strangers;  and  each  generation,  looking  cither  backw^irds  or 
forwards,  must  have  tics  of  consanguinity  equally  as  powerful 


21 

as  our  own ;  hence,  unless  our  recognition,  &c.  in  another  world 
is  general  and  unconfined,  consider  for  a  moment  what  a  sin- 
gular state  of  society  would  be  that  of  heaven  !  Each  genera- 
tion looking  to  two  or  three  links  of  immediate  connexion  only, 
we  must  quickly  be  thrown  into  a  state  of  inextricable  con- 
fusion, to  unravel  which,  the  Gordian  knot,  in  comparison, 
would  be  a  trifle  !* 

*  I  may  help  this  confusion  by  the  following  statements  cut  out  of 
newspapers,  and  which  having  a  slight  connexion  with  the  subject  un- 
der consideration,  will  at  least  amuse,  if  they  do  not  instruct:  of  the 
calculations  as  to  correctness,  I  have  never  undertaken  to  go  through 
them.     The  writer  of  one  of  them  signs  himself  E.  J.  Pierce. 

Population  of  the  World. — According  to  M'Gregor,  the  popu- 
lation of  the  world  is  812,553,712,  v/hich  is  divided  by  Bell  as  follows: 
Whites,  ....  440,000,000 

Copper  coloured,  -  -  -  15,000,000 

Mulattoes,         ....  230,000,000 

Blacks,  ....  120,000,000 

Hassell  deemed  the  world's  population  to  be  936,401,000,  possessing 
the  following  religions  : 

Christians,        ....  252,600,000 

Jews,  ....  5,000,000 

Mahometans,    ....  120,105,000 

Brahminists,      .  ...  -  140,000,000 

Buddists,  -  ,  ,  ,  313,977,000 

All  others,        ....  134,490,000 

The   Christian  World  : — 

Catholics,  ....  137,000,000 

Protestants,       ....  65,000,000 

Greek  Church,  &c.,     -  -  -  50,000,000 

The  population  of  Europe  is  estimated  by  Malte  Brun  at  214,000,000 
souls.     Asia  is  put  down  by  Balbi  at  413,844,300. 

Life  and  Death. — The  population  of  the  earth  is  estimated  at  one 
thousand  millions,  and  a  generation  lasts  thirty-three  years.  There- 
fore, in  thirty-three  years  the  1,000,000,000  must  all  die!  Conse- 
quently,  the  number  of  deaths  will  be,  by  approximation: — Each 
year,  30,000,000;  each  day,  82,101  ;  each  hour,  3,421;  each  minute, 
57;  each  second,  nearly  1.     If,  on  the  other  hand,  as  has  been  calcu- 


22 

I  might  here  suggest  for  consultation  on  the  subject  of  mu- 
tual recognition  in  another  world,  "  Pol  whole's  Discourses  on 
Different  Subjects."  London,  1788.  In  his  10th  discourse, 
after  giving  the  views  of  a  future  state  from  philosophy  and 
Christianity,  he  infers  the  certainty  of  mutual  recognition, 
from  a  consciousness  of  our  identity ;  from  the  solicitude  of 
the  departed  for  the  welfare  of  survivors,  as  deduced  from  La- 

lated,  the  number  of  births  is  to  that  of  deaths  as  twelve  to  ten,  there 
will  be  born  each  year,  36,000,000;  each  day,  98,896;  each  hour, 
4,098;  each  minute,  68 ;  each  second,  over  1. 

LEARNING. 

"  One  of  my  great  grandfathers  was  a  Marblehead  fisherman,  and  all 
my  relations  are  fond  of  the  occupation;  we  throw  out  our  opinions, 
that  are  little  worth,  and  sometimes  draw  up  from  the  sea  of  literature 
the  opinion  of  some  big  fish.  I  do  not  know  tlie  occupations  of  all  my 
great  grandfathers,  and  great  great  grandfathers,  and  great  great  great 
grandfathers,  i&c.  I  must  have  had  a  great  many  of  them.  Once  on 
a  long  voyage  I  went  back  to  the  twentieth  generation,  and  found  that 
I  must  have  had  about  1,058,576  within  the  last  seven  centuries,  and 
agreeably  to  such  data,  as  Sir  Isaac  Newton  used  to  ripen  his  chro- 
nological conclusions,  the  number  of  my  great  and  great  great  and 
great  great  great  grandfathers,  &c.,  since  the  creation,  (allowing  it  the 
shortest  date,  that  the  computations  of  the  most  learned  divines  will 
admit,)  say  5836  years  or  58  centuries  36  years,  or  175  ages,  the  whole 
number  of  my  great  great  great  grandfathers,  must  have  been 
47,890,485,652,059,026,823,698,344,598,447,161,988,085,597,568,237,568 
or  forty-seven  thousand  eight  hundred  and  ninety  octillions,  four  hun- 
dred and  eighty-five  thousand  six  hundred  and  fifty-two  septillions, 
fifty-nine  thousand  and  twenty-six  sextillions,  eight  hundred  and 
twenty-three  thousand  six  hundred  and  ninety-eight  quintillions,  three 
hundred  and  forty  four  thousand  five  hundred  and  ninety-eight  quad- 
rillions, four  hundred  and  forty-seven  thousand  one  hundred  and  sixty- 
one  trillions,  nine  hundred  and  eighty-eight  thousand  and  eighty-five 
billions,  five  hundredand  ninety-seven  thousand  five  hundred  and  sixty- 
eight  millions,  two  hundred  and  thirty-seven  thousand  five  hundred 
and  sixty-eight  great  grandfathers — a  greater  enumeration  than  will  be 
intelligible  to  all  of  the  present  generation  :  what  trouble  there  must 
have  been  in  the  world  just  to  bring  in  a  poor  old  fisherman's  grandson!" 


23 

zarus  and  the  rich  man;*  from  the  pleasure  promised  in  the 
society  of  Abraham  and  the  prophets,  &c. ;  from  the  declara- 
tion of  Jesus  Christ  to  the  penitent  thief;  from  Christ  being 
known  to  the  apostles  when  transfigured  ;f  and  from  the  im- 
plication in  St.  Paul's  declaration,  that  "  they  who  sleep  in 
Jesus,  God  will  bring  with  him."  The  whole  of  this  discourse 
appears,  by  the  arguments  employed,  to  be  a  mere  "  petitio 
principii" — and  all  the  inferences  deduced  from  merely  mortal 
feelings  and  impressions,  unsubstantiated  by  any  of  the  posi- 
tions he  assumes,  as  is  well  confirmed  by  the  review  of  the 
work  in  the  Anal.  Rev.  v.  5.  1790,  p.  69. 

A  small  treatise  appeared  in  1838,  in  this  city,  entitled, 
"  The  Recognition  of  Friends  in  another  World,"  of  which 
several  editions  have  since  been  given  to  the  public.  Its  in- 
tention was  to  soothe  the  sorrows  of  the  bereaved,  and  to  mul- 
tiply the  joys  of  the  happy.  Its  benevolent  purport  is  unques- 
tionable, and  it  required  only  the  garb  of  certainty,  and  a  solid 
foundation,  to  render  it  in  all  respects  of  the  deepest  interest. 
Its  arguments,  &c.,  are,  however,  apparently  derived  from 
Polwhele;  at  least  they  are,  like  his,  founded  on  supposition, 
but  rendered  attractive  by  an  address  to  the  feelings,  rather 
than  to  the  understanding,  in  the  hour  of  deep  affliction.  As 
the  views  I  have  ventured  to  propose  are  in  direct  opposition 
to  those  contended  for  in  the  treatise  mentioned,  it  becomes  a 
duty  to  ask  those  who  have  perused  it  with  care,  and  with 

*  This  beautiful  history,  if  not  intended  for  an  allegorical  allusion 
alone,  seems,  indeed,  to  present  such  an  uncommon  and  unanticipated 
instance  of  Christian  charity  and  benevolence  in  a  wretched  outcast 
from  heaven,  and  an  inmate  of  the  gulf  of  endless  wo,  that  it  would 
almost  tempt  us  to  believe  that  his  faith  might  have  led  to  his  for- 
o-iveness,  as  was  the  case  with  the  penitent  thief. 

t  This  could  hardly  be  called  a  case  of  re-cognition,  since  it  would 
seem  they  equally  knew  both  Moses  and  Elias,  whom  they  never  be- 
fore had  seen. 


24 

minds  uncontrolled  by  personal  affliction,  what  it  proves?  I 
think  the  reply  must  be,  absolutely  nothing  of  all  it  professes ! 
All  that  is  advanced  is  bare  supposition,  devoid  of  "philoso- 
phical acumen,  or  logical  precision,"  as  I  shall  attempt  to  de- 
monstrate. 

In  the  preface  we  are  told,  that  "  the  design  is  to  show  the 
consonance  of  this  doctrine  with  reason  and  Scripture,"  &c., 
so  as  to  enable  all  "to  give  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in 
them."  Unquestionably  this  is  an  important  desideratum,  but 
one,  we  fear,  the  treatise  in  question  will  never  enable  us  to 
perform.  It  "does  not  pretend  to  have  brought  forward  all 
the  passages  of  Scripture  which  throw  light  upon  this  subject. 
If  it  has  succeeded  in  making  it  appear  that  the  belief  of  this 
doctrine  is  reasonable  [it  ought  to  be,  if  true!]  in  itself,  and 
that  the  word  of  God  allows  us  to  indulge  in  it,  the  end  will 
be  attained." — Most  assuredly;  but  should  it  be  unfounded 
and  erroneous,  what  then  ? 

At  p.  14,  we  are  told,  that  "of  the  precise  nature  of  the 
happiness  of  the  blessed,  &c.,  we  know  very  little;  nor,  "with 
our  limited  faculties,  could  we  probably  comprehend  them." 
Admitting  this  to  be  the  case,  why  thus  venture  to  place 
amongst  these  incomprehensible  mysteries  of  a  future  state, 
the  insignificant  enjoyment  of  this  mutable  existence,  derived 
from  our  personal  recognition  of  friends  here,  when  each  day's 
experience  proves  that  enjoyment  to  be  clouded  by  family 
feuds,  by  interruption  of  friendship,  and  even  of  relationship, 
from  motives  of  self-interest,  of  politics,  and  not  unfrequently 
of  religion  itself,  by  which  the  most  bitter  enmity  is  awa- 
kened? With  what  happy  associations  of  past  feelings  must 
not  such  friends  and  relatives  meet  each  other  in  another 
world,  if  those  feelings  are  of  mortal  mould  !  What  a  blessing 
must  their  recognition  prove,  should  they  chance  to  meet  in 
heaven ! 

P.  15. — "  Subjects  which  Scripture  has  carefully  concealed 


25 

are  not  to  he  speculated  on."  Why,  then,  has  the  author  ven- 
tured to  indulge  in  those  that  form  the  basis  of  his  book? 
Surely  it  will  not  be  maintained  that  they  are  exempt  from 
that  concealment !  The  "  blessedness  of  the  dead"  would 
rest  on  slender  grounds,  if  dependent  on  a  train  of  feelings 
similar  to  those  which  actuate  us  here  below :  and  the  quota- 
tion (Luke  XX.  35,  36)  intended  to  afford  "the  clearest  and 
most  satisfactory  account  of  the  happiness  of  the  redeemed," 
that  they  "  neither  marry,  nor  are  given  in  marriage,  but  are 
equal  to  angels,"  &c.,  seems  to  render  the  affirmed  recog- 
nition of  husband  and  wife  extremely  problematical,  if,  indeed, 
it  be  not  an  explicit  denial  of  it!  How  would  such  recognition 
accord  with  those  blissful  feelings  in  the  case  of  the  loving 
partner  of  seven  successive  husbands,  or  hundreds  of  a  similar 
character?  To  vvhich  of  them,  on  meeting  that  numerous 
phalanx,  would  she  By  and  cleave  to,  as  bone  of  her  bone?  or 
would  she  become  the  joint  stock  of  seven  partners  ?  If  all 
are  equal  to  the  angels,  their  thoughts  and  feelings  must  have 
changed  from  mortal  to  those  of  an  heavenly  and  angelic 
type ;  and  if  so,  they  would  be  universal ;  and  divided  or  par- 
tial affections  could  not  there  predominate. 

P.  18. — "Never  again  will  they  be  called  upon  to  take  a 
final  leave,"  &c.  If  they  do  meet  and  recognise  each  other 
in  the  other  world,  the  leave  here  taken  obviously  cannot  be 
caWed  final,  ^^  We  feel  that  theirs  must  be  indeed  a  blissful 
state,  who  are  conscious  that  they  can  never  be  separated 
fro?n  those  they  love,^^  &c.  Now  if  this  be  true,  how  can  we 
reconcile  this  feeling  of  affection  with  its  direct  opposite  of  in- 
tense affliction,  in  the  inevitable  remembrance  (for  if  memory 
holds  as  to  the  one,  so  must  it  likewise  to  the  other)  of  those 
dear  and  beloved  friends  and  relatives,  who,  being  blotted  out, 
are  not  to  be  found  within  the  precincts  of  heaven?  Detween 
them  and  those  there  is  a  great  gulf!  and  if  they  can  cast 
their  view  athwart  that  gulf,  and  see  those  friends  "afar  off," 

c 


26 

whilst  they  are  securely  placed  in  Abraham's  bosom,  witness- 
ing thus  their  torments  and  despair;  is  such  recognition 
adapted,  according  to  mortal  feelings,  to  heighten  the  ecstatic 
joys  which  we  calculate  on  in  heaven?  Though  accounted 
unworthy,  yet  they  must  still  be  remembered,  or  memory 
both  of  good  and  bad  must  be  equally  obliterated.  If,  then, 
it  does  exist,  with  mortal  feelings  still  prevailing,  surely  the 
conviction  of  the  sufferings  of  their  friends  must  continue 
throughout  eternity,  and  prove  an  equal  source  of  unmitigated 
grief!  But  we  are  told  that  sighing  and  sorrow  have  no  place 
in  heaven,  and  that  all  tears  shall  be  wiped  from  every  eye. 
These  inconsistencies  are  not  reconciled  in  the  treatise  ad- 
verted to. 

P.  21. — "  Permitted  to  enjoy  the  society  of  an  innumerable 
company  of  angels,"  &c.  Who  are  these?  Those  so  created 
ab  initio,  or  those  so  constituted  of  the  spirits  of  the  just  made 
perfect?  In  either  case,  such  enjoyment  must  be  general,  not 
particular.  Here  would  have  been  the  most  appropriate  place 
to  have  fully  described,  and  proved,  if  possible,  the  personal 
joys  of  specif  c  relationship  from  earthly  reminiscences  and 
associations  on  mutual  recognition!  And,  as  further  sustained 
in  p.  22,  that  "  such  is  the  society,  and  such  the  blessedness 
of  the  saints  in  light."  Now  we  seriously  ask,  where,  in  all 
that  is  advanced  in  the  treatise,  is  to  be  found  the  slightest 
proof,  or  even  a  reasonable  idea,  of  the  recognition,  as  such, 
of  earthly  friends  and  relatives?  Happily,  our  recognition  is 
not  to  be  limited  by  the  petty,  partial  notions  of  present  and 
terrestrial  speculation.  We  shall,  no  doubt,  recognise  Abra- 
ham, Adam,  and  every  one  of  his  descendants,  whenever  met 
with,  and  enjoy  the  treasures  of  their  information  of  past 
events  and  times,  on  which  history  has  been  silent  or  misled 
us.  We  shall,  in  like  manner,  recognise  our  own  immediate 
friends  and  relatives,  if  there,  but  not  as  we  now  know  ihem  I 
They,  and  all  the  hosts  of  heaven,  will  love,  and  be  beloved. 


27 

as  kindred  spirits.  No  longer  under  the  fetters  of  mortality, 
all  mundane  affections,  all  the  narrow,  contracted  feelings  of 
mere  human  nature,  cease;  whilst  love  and  peace,  and  uni- 
versal happiness,  pervade  the  united  society  of  the  children  of 
one  great^  merciful,  and  beneficent  Parent. 

In  the  second  chapter  of  the  work,  the  recognition  of  saints 
is  taken  up,  in  which  we  find  it  proposed,  whether  "  we  shall 
recosfnise  amonsj  them  those  whom  we  knew  and  loved  on 
earth,"  and  "  if  so,  will  those  feelings  of  affection  which  linked 
us  together  here,  be  renewed  and  perpetuated  in  heaven?" 
'Now  this,  as  the  title  of  the  book  evinces,  constitutes  the  pith 
of  the  whole  inquiry,  and  the  point  to  be  (not  yet)  proved,  in 
order  to  be  enabled  to  afford  a  reason  of  our  hope,  &c.  So 
much  has  already  been  said  in  reply  to  it,  that  further  remark 
would  have  been  omitted,  but  that  in  answer  to  the  above 
question,  the  author,  p.  25,  says,  "that  it  is  a  natural  inquiry, 
and  if  logical  accuracy  was  aimed  at,  we  should  consider  sepa- 
rately, 1.  Whether  the  souls  of  the  righteous  in  their  disem- 
bodied state,  and  immediately  after  death,  will  know  each 
other,  or  2.  Whether,  this  recognition  {if  it  occurs  at  all) 
takes  place  only  after  the  reu7iion  of  the  soul  and  body  at  the 
resurrection  day, — and  3.  Whether,  if  such  knowledge  exists, 
the  attachments  which  bind  us  here,  will  be  continued  here- 
after." It  may  surely,  with  strict  propriety,  be  here  demanded, 
whether  these  were  not  the  points  that  were  to  be  proved?  and 
why,  with  three  such  important  links  in  the  chain  that  was  to 
lead  to  the  conviction  of  the  certainty  of  the  main  object  of 
inquiry,  they  are  thus  passed  over,  and  not  "  considered  sepa- 
rately, with  all  logical  accuracy  V  It  seems  indeed  a  natU' 
ral  inquiry,  fully  arising  from  the  very  point  that  was  to  be 
proved,  and  from  which  the  chief  source  of  consolation  was  to 
be  derived  by  the  bereaved,  for  whom  the  work  was  expressly 
written.  It  may  be  feared,  however,  that  such  logical  accu- 
racy might  not  readily  aid  the  superstructure,  but  rather  tend 


28 

to  even  undermine  the  foundation  itself,  and  thereby  show  its 
weakness.  It  is,  in  fact,  admitted,  p.  26,  that  "  it  does  not 
necessarily  follow,  that  the  peculiar  ties  which  bind  us  here, 
will  be  perpetuated  hereafter."  We  erroneously  imagined, 
that  this  was  the  very  thing  contended  for,  as  the  chief  source 
of  comfort  to  those,  whose  pilgrimage  on  earth  had  been  ren- 
dered painful  by  the  bereavement  of  some  beloved  object !  for 
if  otherwise,  the  mere  recognition  would  seem  to  be  of  a  very 
secondary  consideration ;  and  the  proposition  above  advanced 
appears  to  put  at  rest  the  chief  purport  of  the  whole  investi- 
gation ; — accordingly,  the  writer  seems  entirely  undetermined 
which  side  of  the  question  to  assume ;  for  he  immediately  adds, 
that  "  in  like  manner,  if  it  be  proved,  that  friends  will  recog- 
nise each  other  in  their  glorified  bodies,  it  does  not  follow  as 
a  consequence,  that  pure  disembodied  spirits  will  possess  such 
a  recognition."  May  v^e  be  allowed  to  ask  what  is  that  pre- 
sumed difference  between  a  disembodied  spirit  which  may  not  ■ 
possess  recognition,  and  that  of  a  glorified  body  that  may,  i^ 
proved  ?  Now  all  these  several  and  separate  propositions,  to 
be  strictly  accurate,  ought  (we  are  told)  to  be  xiistinctly  proved, 
and  in  this,  we  most  heartily  agree,  for  this  was  the  essence  of 
the  whole  work.  But  no;  it  is  shortly  after  stated,  that  "  this 
would  be  foreign  to  our  present  purpose."  Indeed !  then  I  have 
mistaken  altogether  the  drift  of  the  author.  I  considered  it  of 
the  first  importance  that  such  proof  should  be  afforded  of  the 
position  laid  down,  as  being  essentially  requisite  to  enable  the 
reader  "  to  give  a  reason  for  the  hope  that  is  in  him."  It  is 
added,  however,  as  a  reason  for  omitting  this,  that  "  it  would 
be  neither  interesting  nor  instructive  to  our  readers  to  enter 
into  all  the  niceties  of  the  argument."  This  is  truly  extraor- 
dinary! Surely  the  author  must  think  but  lightly  of  his 
readers,  if  he  deems  them  incapable  of  enjoying  a  metaphysi- 
cal treat  on  a  most  interesting  topic;  and  that,  therefore,  they 
ought  to  be  satisfied  with  a  simple  assertion,  a  mere  ipse  dixit; 


29 

or  a  "stat  pro  raiione  voluntas!"  In  fact,  it  is  by  this  slighted 
measure  alone,  that  a  reader  could  possibly  arrive  at  a  just 
conclusion,  and  say  with  truth,  that  his  reason  was  fully 
satisfied.* 

In  reviewing  "  the  whole  subject  as  one  and  indivisible,  and 
in  attempting  to  show  that  departed  spirits,  whether  in  the  body, 
or  out  of  the  body,  will  know  each  other,  and  that  the  pure  and 
holy  affections  of  love  and  friendship  which  subsist  now,  will 
subsist  for  ever,"  I  feel  constraine'd  to  say,  that  assertions  are 
mistaken  for  proof,  and  weak  analogies  for  direct  truths.  To 
confirm  this,  I  shall  merely  take  notice  of  the  chain,  by  which 
the  whole  is  linked  together,  by  pointing  to  the  words  through 
which  the  connexion  may  be  considered  as  maintained. 

P.  27. — "  This  doctrine  appears  to  be  perfectly  consonant  to 
reason,  for  unless,^''  &c. 

P.  28. — "The  veracity  of  Him  who  cannot  lie,  seems  to 
stand  pledged." 

P.  28,  29. — "  Surely  it  will  give  us  more  exalted  views," — 
"but  to  know  this,  it  seems  necessary^'' — "  and  if  we  are  per- 
mitted to  know  any  of  the  saints  in  light,  ive  see  (verily,  through 
a  glass,  darkly,)  no  reason  why  we  may  not  know  them  all." 
"  We  may  reasonably  suppose  that,"  "  it  must  certainly  be," — 
"This  could  not  he  unless  there  was  a  mutual  recognition," 
&c.  "/i^  is  therefore  in  accordance  with  the  soundest  prin- 
ciples of  reason  to  suppose,^"*  &c. — together  with  much  of  the 
same  character. 

Now,  in  all  these  gratuitous  suppositions,  not  a  shadow  of 
proof  appears,  such  as  the  reader  had  been  led  to  imagine 
would  be  presented  to  his  eager  expectations;  and  from  which 

*The  reader  is  requested  to  turn  to  the  words  of  the  R-ev.  John 
Newton,  at  page  27  of  the  treatise  under  consideration,  as  introduced 
from  Hannah  More — and  judge  how  far  they  are  applicable  to  the  body 
as  here  existing,  and  as  in  its  affirmed  resurrection  identically  1 

c2 


30 

he  had  pleased  himself  to  be  qualified  to  give  a  satisfactory 
reason  for  his  hope  in  the  premises. 

At  p.  30. — At  last  comes  the  great  stumbling  block  to  all 
the  foregoing  pleasing  anticipations  of  heavenly  recognition ! 
"  But  one  considerable  objection  to  this  doctrine."  Yes  truly — 
fatal  to  it ;  and  it  would  be  no  objection,  if,  as  a  matter  of 
faith,  it  could  be  shown  to  be  scriptural  doctrine,  and  not  the 
pleasing  fiction  of  imperfect  reason.  The  objection  stated,  is 
"  the  consciousness  that  some  of  our  relations  and  friends  being 
absent,  must  be  in  a  state  of  suffering  and  woe."  Surely  such 
consciousness  would  be  {not  mei'ely  "at  first  sight"  as  is  stated, 
but  in  pe7'petuo)  "  an  insuperable  obstacle  to  the  persuasion  that 
the  blessed  will  recognise  each  other  after  death."  Now,  how 
is  this  most  important  part  of  the  subject  under  consideration 
disposed  of?  Not  by  solid  proof  from  revelation,  by  which 
the  pro  or  con  might  be  substantially  settled;  but  by  a  sophis- 
tical proposition,  which  may  possibl}"  be  regarded  as  proving 
more  against  than  for  it.  "  A  moment's  reflection  will  con- 
vince us  that  this  objection,  if  it  have  any  iceigkt,  (has  it 
none?)  will  apply  with  equal  force  to  our  knowing,  as  we  cer- 
tainJy  must  know,  that  any  part  of  the  human  family  is  con- 
demned to  eternal  punishment,"  &c.  Quere  ?  does  the  writer 
suppose  that  such  knowledge  on  the  part  of  celestial  beings 
will  tend  to  diminish  their  affliction  on  behalf  of  their  own 
unfortunate  relatives?*     We  then  have  given  to  us  a  statement 

*Witli  how  much  comparative  indifference  do  we  read  in  the  daily 
papers,  of  massacres — of  death  from  poison — assassination — from  fires, 
from  accidents  by  steam  or  crushing  by  rail-road  cars,  4&c.,  so  long  as 
they  do  not  personally  affect  us  or  our  near  relations !  A  shudder,  a 
moment  of  mental  sympathy,  and  for  the  most  part,  all  is  forgotten  I 
Nay.  how  quickly  are  our  dearest  and  nearest  friends  consigned  to 
oblivion,  v>'hen  the  first  bui'st  of  aflliction  has  passed  by,  after  seeing 
their  remains  deposited  in  the  tomb.  Surely,  with  such  apathy  here, 
recognition  in  another  world,  can,  to  the  majority  of  the  human  race, 
be  a  matter  of  but  triflinir  consideration  ! 


31 

of  the  "great  day  of  final  account,"  in  which  "we  shall  all 
behold  a  lasting  separation  made  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,"  and  "  yet  it  cannot  he  supposed,  that  the  condemna- 
tion of  the  latter,  loill  in  the  least  degree,  (alas !  for  recog- 
nition and  reminiscence !)  disturb  the  felicity  of  the  former !" 
"  Such  a  supposition  would  be  irreconcilable  with  the  perfec- 
tion of  the  heavenly  bliss,"  &c.  No  doubt  it  would— and  this 
leads  us  cheerfully  to  adopt  the  views  suggested,  of  the  total 
absence  of  recognition  conformably  to  our  earthly  conceptions 
of  friendship  and  affection,  and  that  in  heaven,  heavenly  feel- 
ings alone  exist.* 

The  train  of  suppositions  are  thus  continued  at  p.  31,  et 
seq. — 

"  We  cannot  for  a  moment  thinh.^^  "  And  ichy  may  it  not 
he  the  same."  "  If  requisite  for,"  &c.  "  We  may  humbly 
presume,^''  &;c.  "  The  probability  is,"  &c.  "  We  may  easily 
conceive,  that  it  will  add  much  to  the  happiness  of  the  blessed, 
to  meet  many  of  their  friends  in  heaven;  whilst  the  refection 
that  some  whom  they  loved  on  earth,  are  not  there,  will  not 
he  permitted  to  mar  their  felicity,"  &c.  &c. 

Here,   then,   we   find   the   Gordian    knot    completely    cut 

^  The  reader  is  here  referred  to  a  short  review  of  a  Sermon  by  J.  J. 
Rye,  A.  B.,  in  the  Analyt.  Review,  17f)2 — vol.  ii,  p.  lOG — entitled 
*'  Personal  Remembrance  amongst  the  Joys  of  the  other  World,"  &c. 

"  The  consolatory  doctrine  of  this  discourse  is  treated  by  the  preacher 
in  a  'popular  toaij,  more  adapted  perhaps  to  impress  the  imagination 
with  pleasing  ideas,  than  to  convey  entire  conviction  to  the  under- 
standing. At  least  we  must  think,  that  his  argument  receives  little 
additional  force,  from  the  reference  which  he  makes  to  Homer's  ac- 
count of  the  interview  between  Achilles  and  Patroclus  in  the  shades  ! 
Those  who  wish  to  see  the  question  more  fully  discussed,  may  consult 
Dr.  Price's  excellent  dissertation  upon  the  subject." 

It  is  with  regret  I  state  that  I  have  never  been  able  to  meet  with 
Dr.  Price's  dissertation,  and  of  course  cannot  give  any  of  the  views 
afforded  by  him. 


32 

through,  by  the  force  of  theological  acumen  !  and  hasten  tt 
bring  our  remarks  to  a  conclusion. 

If  the  object  in  question  is  proved  by  the  work  we  have  thus 
considered,  benevolent  as  it  undoubtedly  is  intended  to  be,  we 
must  confess  that  we  are  altogether  ignorant  of  the  nature  of 
proof!  The  exposition  given,  is  certainly  not  warranted  by 
any  clear  and  undisputed  text  of  Scripture,  and  must  be 
viewed  as  a  mere  ad  captandum  appeal  to  the  miserable  finite 
and  contracted  feelings  of  imperfect  human  nature !  The  al- 
leged prohahilities  from  Scripture  are  mere  suppositions — 
calling  up  Abraham  from  the  cave  of  Ephron;  of  David  and 
his  child  by  Bathsheba,  &c.,  do  not  surely  amount  to  proof; 
nay,  they  are  badly  employed  for  the  purpose  intended  ;  and 
when,  in  chapter  4,  w^e  are  told  that  "  the  doctrine  is  further 
proved  from  the  New  Testament,"  in  vain  do  we  look  for  it, 
or  recognise  such  proof,  by  the  reference  to  St.  Paul,  1  Cor. 
xiii.  12  ;  to  the  transfiguration ;  to  the  twelve  apostles  sitting 
upon  twelve  thrones.  &c. ;  or  from  the  penitent  thief,  aided, 
as  is  imagined,  by  sundry  commentators.  "  Is  there  any 
thing  fanciful.,  it  is  asked,  in  certain  proposed  persons  who 
had  met  on  earth,  recognising  each  other  in  heaven  ]"  No, 
assuredly.  But  it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  this  is  not  the 
great  design  that  was  to  be  proved ;  but  to  substantiate  the 
recognition  o?  friends  and  relatives  as  such  here  beloiv,  in 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  !  It  is  a  subject  that  is  not  established 
by  revelation,  and  must,  consequently,  be  sustained  by  suppo- 
sition, whichsoever  side  of  the  argument  may  be  advocated, 
and  that  adhered  to  that  may  appear  most  reasonable ;  and 
although  as  a  merely  metaphysical  proposition,  it  may  be  al- 
lowed to  interest  those  who  are  attached  to  such  speculations, 
it  does  not  seem  calculated  to  prove  of  a  beneficial  tendency, 
in  either  its  character  or  bearing.  It  may  tend,  for  a  short 
time,  to  assuage  the  grief  of  the  mourner;  but  at  a  period  of 


33 


calmer  and  more  tranquillized  feeling,  we  cannot  doubt  that 
far  greater  comfort  may  be  obtained  by  a  careful  perusal  of 
numerous  passages  of  sacred  writ,  than  by  yielding  to  the 
pleasing  reveries  of  this  and  other  works  of  a  like  descrip- 
tion. 


ON  THE  DESCENT 

Of  Jesus  Christ  into  Hell — as  an  Article  of  Belief  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church — icith  an  Attempt  to  show 
that  it  cannot  be  proved  from  the  Sacred  Scriptures. 


Having,  in  a  preceding  part  of  the  remarks  here  presented 
to  the  public,  pointed  to  two  or  three  of  the  Articles  of  the 
Episcopal  church,  which  appear  to  need  some  modification,  I 
then  mentioned  my  intention  of  more  fully  entering  on  the 
consideration  of  that,  which  refers  to  the  descent  of  Jesus 
Christ  into  hell  as  being  proved  from  Scripture,  and  consti- 
tuting, on  that  score,  an  item  in  the  Apostles'  creed.  I  feel 
much  diffidence  in  approaching  a  subject  held  so  sacred  hy 
the  church;  and,  but  for  my  firm  belief  of  its  error,  and  of  its 
conveying  a  doctrine  that  is  not  warranted  by  Scripture,  I 
should  have  shrunk  from  the  attempt,  although  it  would  have 
been  utterly  out  of  my  power,  in  repeating  that  portion  of  the 
creed,  to  have  given  to  any  inquirer  a  reason  for  the  faith  in 
which  I  thus  asserted  my  belief. 

In  considering  this  subject,  the  first  step  essential  seems  to 
be  that  of  ascertaining  the  authenticity  of  the  so  called  Apos- 
tles' creed;  and  here  we  at  once  stumble  upon  a  heap  of  un- 
certainties as  to  its  real  author,  or  authors,  however  great  may 
be  its  intrinsic  merits,  and  its  standing  in  the  church,  as  may 
be  seen  under  the  article  Creed,  in  Buck's  Theological  Dic- 
tionary.    It  is  not  my  intention,  however,  to  confine  myself 


35 

to  his  concise  remarks,  but  I  shall  derive  my  observations 
from  a  distant  period.  Although  the  authorities  on  which  I 
might  draw,  are  numerous,  I  shall  limit  myself  to  one  alone, 
who  appears  to  have  consulted  all  previous  and  contemporary 
writers  in  the  formation  of  the  work  he  himself  has  left  us. 
It  is  entitled,  "Hermanni  Witsii  Exercitationes  sacrai  in  Sym- 
bolum  quod  Apostolorum  dicitur,"  &c.  The  edition  I  have  is 
the  3d.  4to.  Amst.  1697:  the  1st  edition  was  printed  in  1681. 
Of  its  estimation,  a  judgm.ent  may  be  formed  from  what  Wal- 
chius  says  of  it,  viz. — "  cum  ob  egregium  rerum  adparatum  ; 
tmn  ob  solidam  illarum  et  perspicuam  expositionem  merito 
laudantur,"  &c.     Bibl.  Theol.  Select.  V.  1,  p.  309. 

After  adverting  to  authors  before  him,  Witsius  proceeds  to 
tell  us,  that  the  Romish  church  is  so  confident  of  its  being  the 
production  of  the  apostles,  that  the  calling  this  in  question  is 
deemed  the  height  of  temerity ;  although  the  doctors  of  that 
church  cannot  determine  precisely  at  what  time  it  was  ac- 
tually framed.  Some  assert,  that  it  is  not  the  production  of 
one  alone  to  whom  the  task  was  allotted,  but  that  each  apostle 
afforded  a  portion  ;  the  creed  being  thus  constituted  of  twelve 
articles,  and  receiving  the  approbation  of  the  collected  council. 
The  individual  portion  of  each  is  then  given  from  Baronius, 
"  laudata  B.  Augustini  auctoritate,  qui  de  Tempore,  Serm. 
CXV.  sic  scripsisse  perhibetur." 

"  Petriis  dixit :  Credo  in  Deum  Patrem,  Omnipotentem. 
Johannes  dixit :  Creatorem  Cceli  et  Terrce. 
Jacobus  dixit :  Credo  et  in  Jesum  Christum,  filium  ejus  uni- 

cum,  Dominum  nostrum. 
Andreas  dixit :  Qui  conceptus  est  de  Spiritu  sancto,  natus  ex 

Maria  Virgine. 
Philipjms  ait :  Passus  sub  Pontio  Pilato,  crucifixus,  mortuus, 

et  scpultus. 
Thomas  ait:    Descendit  ad  Inferos,  tertia  die  resurrexit  a 

mortuis. 


36 

BartholomcBus  dixit:  Ascendit  ad  Coelos,  sedet  ad  dextram 

Dei  Patris  omnipotentis. 
Matthcens  dixit:   Iiide  venturus  est  judicare  vivos  et   mor- 

tuos. 
Jacohiis  AljyJicei :  Credo  et  ia  Spiritum  Sanctum,  Sanctam 

Ecclesiam  Catholicam. 
Simon   Zelotes :    Sanctorum    Communionem,    Remissionem 

Peccatorum. 
Judas  Jacohi :  Carnis  resurrectionem. 
Matthias  complevit :  Vitam  SBternam.     Amen,"* 

All  this,  Witsius  tells  us,  is  attempted  to  be  proved  from  the 
fathers  and  from  reason,  by  the  inscription,  and  from  the  col- 
lation of  the  words  of  the  creed :  the  arguments  by  which  the 
adherents  of  the  opinion  sustain  it  are  stated,  but  are  deemed 
unsatisfactory,  and  are  regarded  by  Witsius  as  false,  or  at  least 
uncertain,  as  he  very  conclusively  shows.  He  adds,  more- 
over, that  in  the  early  state  of  Christianity,  no  other  creed  is 
to  be  found,  but  that  which  Christ  delivers,  Matt,  xxviii.  19 — 
"  Go  ye  therefore  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them,"  &lc.  ; 
and  to  this  alone  the  ancient  fathers  often  appealed. f  By  the 
springing  up  of  heresies  from  time  to  time,  the  church  was 

*  This  formula  may  likewise  be  found,  with  some  slight  variations. 
in  many  other  writers, 

t  Sixtus  Sinensis. — At  p.  42,  Bibliotheca  Sancta,  Le^^d.  1592,  F., 
speaking  of  the  "  Symbolum  Apostolorum,"  says  that  Erasmus,  in  his 
paraphrase  of  Matthew,  declares  his  ignorance  as  to  the  apostles 
having  framed  it.  All  the  orthodox  fathers  declare  that  they  did  ; 
and  Rufinus  is  quoted  on  the  subject.  It  is  stated  that  this  joint  pro- 
duction of  the  apostles  was  indited  by  them  whilst  the  cloven  tongues 
were  resting  on  them,  as  the  foundation  of  their  future  preaching,  in 
order  to  preclude  any  variation  by  others  of  what  they  had  learned 
from  Jesus  Christ;  that  by  their  united  conference,  each  composed 
his  part,  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  St.  Augustin's  sen- 
timents are  then  given  on  the  matter,  and  the  symbol,  as  detailed 
above. 


37 

unable  to  retain  its  original  simplicity ;  whence  it  happened, 
that  to  the  above  plain  command  various  additions  were  con- 
joined, instances  of  which  are  adduced ; '  amongst  which,  is 
that  which  constitutes  the  object  of  this  essay.  "  Constat  ar- 
ticulum  de  Descensu  ad  Inferos  in  multis  Symboli  editionibus 
non  comparinsse.  Ipse  Rufinus  in  expositione  Symboli,  cap. 
20,  testatur  suo  tempore  eum  in  Symbolo  Ecclesias  Romanse 
et  Orientalium  Ecclesiarum  dcfvisse.  Esse  autem  eum  ex 
Symbolo  Afhanasii  in  symbolum  apostolorum  intrusum,  ab 
hominibus  qui  non  animadverterunt  in  eodem  Symbolo  deside- 
rari  articulos  mortis  et  sepulturce,"  &c.  Nor  was  the  term  of 
"  Catholic"  known  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  nor  even  to  Ru- 
finus 300  years  after.  "  Unde  concludimus,  non  esse  hoc 
symbolum  unius  auctoris,  vel  unius  Concilii ;  sed  labentibus 
secidls,  varia  occasione,  a  variis,  multis  accessionibus  locuple- 
tatum  :  exstantibus  tamen  veteris  fundamenti,  cui  reliqua  su- 
per sedificata  sunt,  indiciis." 

Witsius,  though  thus  opposing  its  presumed  origin  from  the 
apostles,  speaks  of  it  as  being  of  high  authority,  though  not  of 
the  highest,  which  the  Romish  church  attaches  to  it ;  and  he 
blames  that  church  for  employing  it  "  pro  formula  quadam 
orationis."  Three  distinct  formula3  exist,  viz ;  "  Decalogus, 
Oratio  Dominica,  et  Symbolum.  In  Decalogo  Deus  loquitur 
Hominibus.  In  Oratione,  Homo  loquitur  Deo.  In  Symbolo, 
Homo  loquitur  et  Deo,  et  Hominibus.  Uti  Oratio  distincta  est 
a  Lege:  ita  et  Symbolum  distinctissimum  est  ab  Oratione." 

Having  concluded  the  inquiry  of  its  origin,  Witsius  proceeds 
to  consider  its  individual  parts,  in  the  order  in  which  they  ap- 
pear in  the  creed ;  and  at  p.  318,  we  have  his  observations  on 
the  subject,  "rZe  descensu  Christi  ad  Inferos,  which  he  denies 
to  be  found  in  any  part  of  Scripture.  "  Dicitur  (says  he) 
quidem  descendisse,  dicitur  in  inferis  fuisse,  sed  ita  junctis 
verbis  ut  descendisse  ad  inferos  prcrdicetur,  nulli  legimus. 
He  refers  again  to  the  fact,  that  in  almost  all  the  ancient 

D 


38 

creeds,  this  article  is  wanting.  The  most  ancient  of  those  in 
which  it  is  found,  is  the  particular  or  private  creed  of  Atha- 
nasius,  if  indeed  it  be  his,  of  which  doubts  exist,  for  Vossius 
shows,  that  "  ante  annum  sexcentesimum  symbohmi  illud  ve] 
omnino  non  fuisse,  vel  saltem  non  fuisse  in  ecclesia  notum." 
Moreover,  those  creeds  that  had  the  article  of  the  descent  into 
hell,  had  not  that  of  his  hnrial^  and  the  reverse;  both  being 
subsequently  but  erroneously  joined  together.  At  the  time  of 
Ruhnus,  "  ipsa  Ecclesia  Romana  erat  contenta  meminisse  so- 
lius  sepidturce;^''  and  Vossius  states,  that  "Orientales  per  de- 
scensum  Christi  ad  inferos,  primitus  intellexisse  quod  occiden- 
tales  vocarent  sepulturam."  Erasmus  thought  the  junction  of 
the  two  was  made  by  Thomas  Aquinas,  who  lived  about  An. 
1250;  but  Witsius  says  he  finds  it  in  Socrates,  lib.  2.  (5th 
century.) 

He  soon  afterwards  says,  that  although  it  is  true,  that  nei- 
ther in  Scripture,  nor  in  ancient  creeds,  the  article  of  the  de- 
scent of  Christ  into  hell  is  verbally  found,  it  is,  nevertheless, 
"a  nobis  pie  creditur  et  asseritur,  modo  senso  commodo ;''''  and 
that,  in  its  investigation,  we  should  care  less  what  some  an- 
cients understood  of  the  words,  than  what  is  to  be  regarded  as 
congruous  to  the  faith,  and  to  Scripture  phraseology — and 
then  proceeds  to  consider  the  unity  of  the  Hebrew  word 
Sheol,  with  the  Greek  word  Ades,  as  denoting  "Sepul- 
chrum,  vel  statum  quorumcunque  hominum  in  morte" — 
all  tending  to  prove  that  the  affirmed  descent  of  Christ  into 
heJl  is  incorrect;  and  he  judiciously  adds,  "Cui  usui  ilia 
anima}  Christi  ad  Tartarum  profectio?"  He  finally  notices 
all  the  places  in  Scripture  wherein  the  Greek  and  Hebrew 
words,  cc^yji  and  sheol,  are  employed,  and  demonstrates  clear- 
ly, that  they  cannot  with  any  propriety  be  forced  into  the 
construction  that  is  put  upon  them  by  the  article  of  the  creed 
which  he  is  considering. 

What  is  above  reported  from  Witsius,  is,  I  think,  sufficient 
to  decide  the  point  at  issue ;  yet,  inasmuch  as  we  are  told  in 


39 

the  articles  of  the  church,  ihut  the  descent  of  Christ  into  hell  is 
"^0  he  thoroughly  received  and  believed,''^  as  it  ^^  may  be 
proved  by  most  certain  loarrants  of  holy  Scripture,''''  I  con- 
sider it  requires  further  proof  of  its  being  entirely  erroneous; 
and  indeed,  the  circumstance  of  permission  being  granted  to 
modify  the  phrase  by  using  "  the  place  of  departed  spirits"  for 
that  of  hell,  shows  the  necessity  of  revision,  and  of  a  more 
explicit  explanation  ;  since  our  children  are  taught  in  the  cate- 
chism, from  their  childhood,  that  doctrine  in  its  natural  accep- 
tation ;  and  with  ^ew  exceptions,  carry  to  their  grave,  their  firm 
belief  in  the  positive  descent  of  their  Saviour  into  the  infernal 
region.  Now  it  surely  is  of  the  utmost  importance  that  nothing 
contradictory  or  doubtful  should  find  a  place  in  our  esteemed 
Liturgy,  or  which  may  be  made  in  any  way  subservient  to  in- 
fidelity; if,  therefore,  any  apparent  difficulty  can  be  softened 
down  or  removed,  is  it  not  imperative  to  attempt  it?  As  the 
Nicene  creed  does  not  assert  the  doctrine  under  consideration, 
why  need  it  be  retained  in  the  Apostle's  creed?  All  may  yield  a 
ready  belief  in  the  former,  who  may  yet  conscientiously  differ 
from  the  latter.  It  was  undoubtedly  a  happy  improvement  in 
the  formation  of  a  Liturgy  for  the  American  Episcopal  Church, 
that  its  framers  had  the  resolution  to  entirely  rescind  that 
most  obnoxious  Athanasian  creed,  by  which  the  parent  church 
of  England  is  still  deformed,  although  strongly  urged  to  retain 
it  by  the  English  prelates ;  and  it  is  a  source  of  deep  regret 
that  our  clergy  did  not  equally  v.'ithstand  their  ill-directed  zeal, 
in  insisting  on  the  retention  of  the  unscriptural  article  we  are 
now  considering,  and  making  that  a  proviso  for  the  conse- 
cration of  our  bishops ! 

Although  the  substitute  allowed  for  the  term  hell,  renders  a 
meaning  less  obnoxious,  yet  we  are  not  enlightened  in  any  de- 
gree, as  to  where  "the  place  of  departed  spirits"  is,  and  why 
they  are  doomed  there  to  remain  until  the  final  judgment.  If 
the  spirits  at  death,  both  good  and  bad,  do  indeed  have  such  a 


40 

habitation,  of  unknown  and  undefined  limitation,  are  we  to 
presume  them  to  be  commingled  together  in  one  common  re- 
ceptacle? Now;  although  we  may  not  maintain  precisely  the 
doctrine  of  purgatory,  little  diflerence  can  be  drawn  between 
the  churches  of  England  and  Rome  in  this  particular,  beyond 
the  power  of  the  latter,  by  masses  and  absolutions,  &c.,  to  re- 
move a  soul  from  this  temporary  abode. 

But  if  we  bring  ourselves  to  believe  that  in  the  sacred  volume 
we  can  find  a  sanction  for  this  especial  article  of  our  creed ; 
we  are  yet  unable  to  perceive,  that,  whether  reading  hell,  or 
place  of  departed  spirits,  such  words  will  reach  the  Saviour's 
intentions,  when  he  said  to  the  penitent  thief,  "  this  day  thou 
shalt  be  with  me  in  paradise,^''  implying,  to  our  imperfect  com- 
prehension, something  very  different  from  that  of  the  preced- 
ing terms,  if,  as  we  are  told,  they  have  the  same  intrinsic 
meaning. 

By  paradise  is  meant,  conformably  to  the  lexicons,  the  third 
heaven,  the  dwelling  of  God,  of  the  holy  angels,  and  of  the 
spirits  of  the  just.  Now,  if  it  was  to  this  place  that  the  spirit 
of  the  thief  accompanied  our  Saviour,  the  term  of  hell,  in  its 
common  acceptation,  is  highly  exceptionable ;  and  yet  it  un- 
questionably is  received  in  that  acceptation,  by  a  large  majority 
of  those  who  read  or  repeat  the  Apostle's  creed.  The  use  of 
the  term  hell,  is  even  defended  by  some  of  our  clergy,  precisely 
on  the  ground,  that  it  is  the  scriptural  expression  of  the  doc- 
trine designed  to  be  taught  in  it,  and  therefore  they  are  dis- 
satisfied with  the  alternative  expression,  and  coincide  fully  with 
Bishop  Pearson  and  others,  who  entertain  no  doubt  of  the 
actual  and  positive  descent  of  Jesus  Christ  into  hell.* 

Sonie  writers  on  the  subject  use  the  term  hades,  {ah.^)  and 

*  Highly  as  all  true  and  orthodox  Churchmen  are  bound  to  venerate 
the  lawn  of  Episcopacy,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  they  are  equally 
bound,  without  conviction,  to  *'  pin  their  faith"  on  the  sleeve  of  every 
individual  whom  it  may  chance  to  adorn  !  at  least  in  the  United  States. 


41 

hell  is  certainly  one  of  its  meanings,  as  the  lexicons  teach  us. 
Thus,  says  one  of  them,  it  is, 

1.  The  invisible  abode  of  the  dead.  2.  Hell, — the  place  of 
torment  into  which  the  fallen  angels  were  cast, — and  where 
the  wicked  are  punished  after  death.  3.  The  grave,  perhaps 
death  personified.  4.  A  state  of  abasement  or  misery  in  this 
life.  But  ccJ'jjs  is  not  the  word  that  is  used  by  our  Saviour  in 
St.  Luke;   it  is  ev  rea  TToc^a^sicmj. 

Besides  the  above  meanings  of  the  word  cc^r^i,  there  is  one 
that  is  the  absolute  reverse  of  hell,  viz :  Heaven  itself.  Co- 
lomesius,  a  presbyter  of  the  English  Church,  and  librarian  of 
the  Lambeth  Library,  in  one  of  his  writings  entitled  ^eifA.tiXicc, 
(Literaria)  p.  302,  4to.  Hamb.  ed.  1709,  has  a  short  chapter, 
headed  "aJ"?;?  p?'o  ccelo  apud  veteres." 

"  Vox  cc^rji  generalis  est,  cum  ad  locum  tormentorum,  turn  ad 
locum  quietis.  Hinc  non  modo  pro  inferis,  verum  etiampro  ccelo 
quandoque  usurpatur — author  innominatus  apud  Suidam,  ^ato-tft 

Sic  Josephuset  post  eum  Theodoretus,  c6<^i6;  omnibus  hominibus 
tribuunt,  impiis  quidem  trKonoirs^ov,  piis  vero  ^areivov.  Adhsec 
asserit  Hugo  Brugthonus,  in  S.  Scripturse  concentu  ab  Isaaco 
Genio  latine  verso,  in  miiltis  vetustissimis  codicibus  mms.  ora- 
tionem  Dominicam  in  hiinc  modum  inveniri,  Trun^  t^/xcov  o  sv 
(t^v).  Veteres  quoque  Macedoncs  orationem  banc  misquam 
aliter  precatos  fuisse." 

I  find  the  above  statement  of  Colomesius  as  to  the  use  of 
the  word  cc^m  for  heaven,  confirmed  in  an  old  Greeco-Latin 
Lexicon,  (1538)  in  which  it  is  stated,  that  '■^  oc^y.q  Macedonuni 
Dialecto,  y^ayo?."  If  then  hades  implies  both  heaven  and  hell, 
surely,  in  the  case  of  our  Saviour,  it  ought  to  be  employed  in 
its  best  signification,  especially  since  St.  Luke  particularly 
states  that  it  was  to  paradise  the  thief  was  to  accompany  him. 
He  says  not  a  word  about  ot^r.c, — and  hence,  I  think  the  pro- 
priety of  making  some  change  in  tlie  obnoxious  term  in  the 

d2 


42 

creed,  must  be  obvious  to  every  one, — since,  whether  the  creed 
was  framed  by  the  apostles,  or  by  others  subsequent  to  them, 
it  is  certain  that  the  words  spoken  by  the  great  head  of  the 
church  have  been  changed,  if  St.  Luke  is  to  be  regarded  as 
authority  in  the  case.  Now  the  apocalyptic  injunction  and 
anathema  are  precise  and  unqualified  as  to  adding  or  dimin- 
ishing aught  of  the  sacred  writings ! 

The  words  employed  by  Jesus  Christ  not  being  in  English, 
but  in  Greek  or  Hebrew  (most  probably  the  latter,  as  being  a 
Jew  by  birth;  the  exclamation  "Eli,  Eli,  lama  sabacthani, 
either  in  Hebrew  or  Syriac,  being  taken  from  the  22d  psalm; 
his  preaching  no  doubt  to  the  Jews  in  their  native  language, 
with  other  analogous  circumstances) ;  it  appears  necessary  in 
this  investigation  to  refer  to  the  particular  idiom,  that  we  may 
the  more  correctly  estimate  the  precise  meaning,  and  thereby 
vindicate,,  or  uproot  the  English  word  that  we  have  adopted  in 
the  creed,  and  which  has  been  familiar  from  early  infancy. 
We  might  indeed  rest  here,  and  confine  the  inquiry  altogether 
to  the  word  paradise,  as  employed  by  St.  Luke;  nevertheless, 
since  that  Evangelist  makes  use  of  two  different  words  in  the 
same  chapter  (23d)  to  express  the  same  mode  of  our  Saviour's 
death,  it  would  appear  correct  to  inquire  further  as  to  that 
which  l:>  the  more  immediate  object  of  research,  remarking 
that  wliCn  any  icord  has  a  variety  of  meanings,*  considerable 
judgment  is  required  on  the  part  of  a  translator,  in  adopting 
that  meaning  which  is  most  conformable  to  the  object  had  in 
view  by  the  original.  St.  Luke  speaks  of  the  malefactors,  in 
the  chapter  referred  to,  as  being  crucified  [£'TTocv^a,'<iciv)  with  our 

*  The  word  bon  in  French,  which  at  first  sight  appears  to  be  so  sim- 
ple, nevertheless,  to  our  surprise,  on  consulting  the  "  Nouveau  Dic- 
tionnaire  de  I'Academie  Francoise,  Paris  ed.  1718 — will  present  to  us 
no  less  than  seventy-four  different  significations  in  its  employment! 
Surely  the  translator  of  any  work  into  another  language,  ought  to  be 
well  acquainted  with  both,  and  witii  all  their  idiomatic  capabilities  ! 


43 

Saviour;  yet,  only  six  verses  further  on,  they  are  said  to  be 
hanged,  [K^ef^xo-hvrav) — and  the  Greek  expresses  it  thus  dif- 
ferently. Are  we,  therefore,  to  suppose  them  literally  hanged 
and  not  crucified,  or  the  reverse,  as  fancy  may  dictate,  without 
reference  to  the  respective  variations  of  meaning  in  the  words? 
It  is  probable  that  both  alike  signify  to  suspend ;  and  that 
although  by  hanging,  crucifixion  is  indirectly  meant,  yet  that 
crucifixion  cannot,  by  any  means,  convey  the  act  of  hanging 
in  its  common  acceptation.  But  in  the  expression  of  our  Saviour 
to  the  thief,  no  such  ambiguity  exists ;  a  single  word  is  alone 
presented  to  us,  that  is,  paradise,  not  hell,  in  any  shape  or  con- 
struction; and  we  cannot  comprehend  its  introduction  into  our 
translation,  without  entering  more  fully  on  the  subject,  which 
will  amply  fortify  us  in  the  persuasion  that  the  word  hell,  (un- 
doubtedly understood  by  the  majority  in  its  most  obnoxious 
sense,)  ought  to  be  replaced  by  some  other  better  calculated  to 
convey  the  true  and  intrinsic  meaning  of  the  text.  Even 
hades,  being  general  in  its  signification,  as  embracing  both 
heaven  and  hell,  will  scarcely  supply  its  place; — paradise  alone 
seems  to  be  the  most  appropriate,  especially  as  it  is  that  used 
by  the  apostle. 

aJ';?^,  as  employed  by  St.  Peter  (Acts  ii.)  is  in  our  transla- 
tion, hell,  and  infernus  in  the  Latin.  But  as  we  believe  some 
other  of  its  numerous  idioms  might  be  here  more  appropri- 
ately made  use  of,  we  shall  not  be  deterred  from  the  re- 
search, although  in  opposition  to  the  high  authority  of  Bishop 
Pearson  and  others;  who,  though  able  and  learned  theologians, 
are  certainly  not  infallible,  either  in  their  views  or  explanations 
of  different  parts  of  the  apostolic  creed. 

St.  Peter  in  his  remarks  (Acts  ii.  27,  31,)  refers  to  the*  16th 
Psalm — it  is  necessary,  therefore,  for  us  to  follow  in  his  foot- 
steps.    The  Greek  word  u^r.g  in  the  Acts,  will  be  found  to  be 

*Si\teentli  in  our  English  translation,  but  fifteenth  in  the  Latin 
Vulo-ate  I     Whence  this  variation? 


44 

in  the  Hebrew  h)^V/  (sheol) — and  we  must  consequently  seek  for 
its  signification  and  synonymes,  as  being  the  Hebrew  represen- 
tation of  the  Greek,  Latin  and  English  term  respectively  made 
use  of. 

Leigh,  in  his  "  Critica  Sacra,"  p.  238,  Lend.  1672,  tells  us 
that  sheol  responds  to  the  Greek  ^<!'»?,  by  which  it  is  invariably 
expressed  in  the  Septuagint,  except  2  Sam.  22,  6,  where  it  is 
translated  davccro^  in  Greek,  and  Infernus  in  the  Latin.  Sheol, 
he  adds,  is  used  in  Scripture  in  four  distinct  senses. 

1.  Metaphorically,  for  hell — That  is,  for  deep  plunging  into 
extreme  sorrow,  miser}^,  and  danger.     Ps.  Ixxxvi.  13. 

2.  For  the  local  place  of  hell,  properly — Prov.  xv.  11. 

3.  For  the  grave — natural  and  common  to  all — Prov.  xxx.  16. 

4.  For  the  lower,  deep,  and  remote  parts  of  the  earth,  with- 
out relation  to  tiie  place  of  punishment. — Ps.  cxxxix.  8.  To 
these,  he  adds, 

5.  For  the  common  place  or  state  of  the  dead.  Ps.  xxx.  3, 
and  many  other  references.  So  ^-^i^?  is  taken  1  Cor.  xv.  55, 
Gen.  xxxvii.  85.  Sheol  signifieth  any  devouring  gulf  or  pit, 
swallowing  up  the  dead,  as  Numb.  xvi.  33; — and  he  remarks, 
that  sheol  is  here  badly  interpreted  in  the  vulgate  by  infernus. 

Gussctius,  in  his  "  Commentarii  Ling.  Ilebraica^,"  fol. 
1702,  p.  812,  very  nearly  agrees  with  the  above;  and  all  that 
is  said  conspires  to  prove,  that  hell,  in  our  common  acceptation, 
is  not  the  appropriate  signification.  Ae^5«o5  and  yeswa,  are 
more  frequently  the  representative  appellations  of  that  place  of 
torment. 

It  would  seem  then,  trom  all  here  stated,  that  our  Saviour  in 
his  reply  to  the  thief,  could  have  had  no  intention  of  conveying 
an  idea  of  his  own  descent  into  hell,  and  for  the  especial  pur- 
pose that  Pearson  and  others  have  assigned  to  him.  Had  such 
been  the  case,  may  it  not  be  presumed  that  his  language 
would  have  been  different,  less  obscure,  and  liable  to  no  mis- 
interpretation ? 


45 

Other  meanings  of  our  vernacular  term  hell,  may  be  curso- 
rily adverted  to  in  connexion  with  «tcf«?,  from  Leigh,  in  the  most 
of  which  he  is  sustained  by  Gussetius,  and  by  Parkhurst,  who 
refers  to  him  with  great  respect. 

Leigh  informs  us,  that  "  «cr«f,  inferi — according  to  Bellar- 
mine  always  signifies  hell,  the  grave  never ;  but  learned  Came- 
ron observes  that  it  never,  but  in  one  place  of  scripture,  sig- 
nifieth  hell,  but  constantly  either  the  grave^  or  the  state  and 
condition  of  a  man  deceased.  Vatablus  and  others,  on  Acts 
ii.  say  that  «<f «?  and  Tartarus,  '  non  recte  confunduntur.  Nam 
^i'i^i  not  pertinet  ad  Doemonia,  sed  tantum  ad  homines  mor- 
tuos,  bonos  malosque,  et  quidem  duntaxet  medio  tempore  inter 
mortem  et  resurrectionem.  Tartara  autem  Grcccorum  ex- 
emplo,  Petrus  dixit  eam  regionem  in  qua  impuri  spiritus  ad 
tempus  judicii,  velut  captivi,  asseverantur."  Grotius,  in  Luc. 
8,  31. 

"aJ'^^s  est  locus  visibns  nostris  subtractus,  et  de  corpore  qui- 
dem cum  accipitur,  sepulchrum  in  quo  est  corpus  sine  animo : 
de  animo  vero,  totam  illam  regionem  in  qua  est  animus  sine 
corpore  significat.  Itaque  fuit  Dives  quidem  fv  x^vj\  sed  fuit 
«»  oc^ri  etiam  Lazarus^  disterminatis  oc^a  regionibus.  Nam  et 
Paradisus  et  Gehenna,  sive,  ut  loquebantur  Gra^ci,  Elysii  et 
Tartara  sunt  £v  c4^})."     Grot,  in  Luc.  16,  23. 

The  w'ord  u^y^i,  as  some  have  remarked,  signifies  three 
things  in  the  New  Testament. 

1.  The  sepulchre.  Acts  ii.  27,  Cor,  frst,  Peter  makes  an  op- 
position between  the  gi-ave  into  which  David  was  shut  up,  and 
the  hell  out  of  which  Christ  was  delivered;  v.  29,  31.  Se- 
condly, Peter  saith,  expressly,  that  the  words  must  be  under- 
stood of  the  resurrection  of  Christ;  v.  3.  Thirdly,  this  ap- 
peareth  by  Paul's  citing  of  it;  Acts  xiii.  34,  35.  Fourthly, 
it  is  so  expounded,  Ps.  xvi.  12,  by  many  Popish  writers,  in- 
ferno, id  est  sejntlchro.  OO^  Here  numerous  references  are 
made  in  proof,  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  ending 


46 

with  Rev.  xx.  13,  14.  "Death  and  u^r,^  are  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire."  Now  we  cannot  say  hell  is  cast  into  hell,  but 
the  g?'ave  into  hell. 

2.  It  signifieth  the  place  of  torment;  Luke  xvi.  23. 

3.  It  is  taken  for  the  Devil  hitnself;  Matt.  xvi.  18 — and  so 
it  is  taken  sometimes  amongst  profane  authors.  Both  the 
Septuagint  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  apostle  in  the  New; 
Acts  ii.  27 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  55  ;  do  use  the  Greek  word  cc^t^g,  and 
the  Latin  interpreter  the  word  infernus  or  inferi,  and  the 
English  the  word  hell,  for  that  which  in  the  Hebrew  text  is 
named  sheol.  The  king's  translators  of  the  Bible  do  render 
the  word  sheol,  in  the  Old  Testament,  usually  hell;  Deut. 
xxxii.  22;  Ps.  ix.  17;  Ixxxvi.  13.  Yet  in  divers  places  they 
call  it  the  jnt;  Job  xvii.  16  ;  and  in  sundry  places,  the  grave; 
and  it  cannot  otherwise  be  well  rendered,  as  Gen.  xxxvii.  35 ; 
xlii.  38;  1  Kings  ii.  6;  Ps.  xlix.  15;  vi.  5;  Isaiah  xxxviii. 
18.  All  learned  Hebrecians,  know  that  sheol  is  more  proper 
for  grave  than  hell;  and  that  the  Flebrews  have  no  word  pro- 
per for  hell,  as  we  take  hell;  but  either  they  uae,  Jiguratwely, 
sheol,  or  more  certainly  Topheth  or  Gehinnom.  For  sheol  is 
in  no  place  so  necessarily  to  be  taken  for  hell,  but  that  it  may 
also  be  taken  for  the  grave.  But  allhough  that  Hebrew  word 
properly  signify  a  receptacle  of  the  bodies  after  death,  yet, 
when  mention  is  of  the  wicked,  by  consequence  it  may  signify 
hell,  as  day  signifieth  light;  the  night,  darkness;  fire,  heat; 
peace,  prosperity.  Again,  sheol  signifieth  a  place  which  is 
dark  and  obscure,  where  nothing  can  be  seen  ;  such  as  the 
grave  or  pit  is,  in  which  the  dead  is  laid;  which,  therefore,  of 
Job  x.  21,  22,  is  called  the  land  of  darkness.  The  Latin 
word  infernus  signifieth,  generally,  a  low  place:  cc^r.q,  like- 
wise, they  translate  in  most  places  hell;  yet  in  one  place, 
1  Cor.  XV.  55,  the  grave. 

"  Sheol,  a  verbo  shaal,  quod  petere  et  postulare  significat, 
quod   sepulchrum  omnes  mortalcs  quasi  hiantis  oris  vorago 


47 

petit;  iinde  et  insatiabile  dictum;  Prov.  xx.  20;  xxx.  16:^ 
vel,  quod  omnes  mortalitatis  ratione  eo  fcruntur,  quasi  ad  ter- 
minum  qiiem  petunt :  vel,  quod  qui  in  sepulchris  conduntur,  a 
viventibus  petuntur  et  desiderantur." — Amesiiis. 

"  AS'y^i^  ab  yi^a^  vel  potius  ab  ex,  priv.  et  vcrbo  i^siv^  et  dicitur 
per  synreresin  pro  xi^i:^,  sine  luce  domus. — Virg.  Latini 
Theologi  infernvm,  a  situ  vocant,  et  inferos^  quce  vox,  si  ab 
inferendo  dicta  est,  tarn  sepulchrum  quam  Gchennam  denotare 
potest.  Ut  enim  in  hanc  animie,  ita  in  illud  corpora  infe- 
runtur." — Amama  Antibarb.  Bibl.  lib.  3.  Profani  vero  au- 
tores  orctim  nominare  solent.  We,  in  English,  call  it  hell  (as 
some  say),  from  the  Old  Saxon  or  German  word  helle;  in 
which  tongues,  originally,  hell  signifieth  deep;  leh  is  low; 
and  so  it  meaneth  a  low  or  deep  place,  and  agrees  with  the 
Hebrew  sheol,  which  is  said,  Deut.  xxxii.  20,  Job  ii.  8,  to  be 
low  and  deep.  Usher  says  (answer  to  Jesuits'  challenge) 
Verstegan's  derivation  is  the  most  probable,  from  being  hilled 
over,  that  is,  hidden  or  covered.  For  in  the  Old  Germaii 
tongue,  from  whence  our  English  was  extracted,  hil  signifieth 
to  hide :  and  in  this  country  (England),  with  them  that  retain 
the  ancient  language  which  their  forefathers  brought  with 
them,  to  hill  the  head,  is  as  much  as  to  cover  the  head:  so 
that,  in  the  original  proprietie  of  the  word,  our  hell  doth  ex- 
actly answer  to  the  Greek,  aSn;,  which  dcnotcth  a  place  un- 
seen." 

Consult,  also,  Cocceius'  "  Comment,  in  Job,"  fol.  1644,  p. 
102,  all  tending  to  show  that  shcol  means  the  sepulchre  or 

*  "Ex  Proverbiorum,  cap.  30,  inter  insatiabilia,  et  ea  quae  nunquam 
dicunt  sujjicit,  sepulchrum  et  xidva  collocantur.  Quserunt  hie  Rabbini 
quae  afRnitas  est  sepulchro  ('7^^;ki'),  cum  vulva.  Sed  responditur,  que- 
madmodum  vulva  recipit  semen,  et  poslea  edit  aliquod  vivens :  ita 
etiam  sepulchrum  recipit  corpora  defunctorum,  et  postea  die  resurrec- 
tionis  eadem  reddit."— Menassah  Ben  Israel,  de  Rcsurrcctione  Mor- 
tuorum,  p.  23. 


48 

grave.  If,  therefore,  aj'y,?  is  the  Greek  representative,  then  it 
must  mean  the  same. 

Should  more  be  wanting  to  satisfy  the  reader  on  the  subject 
under  consideration,  we  refer  him  to  Sixtinus  Amama,  in  his 
work,  entitled  "  Anti-Barbarus  Biblicus,"  12mo.  Amst.  1628, 
wherein  the  I'rauds  and  corruptions  of  the  Scriptures  by  the 
Romish  church  are  fully  set  forth  and  demonstrated,  by  re- 
ference to  the  original  Hebrew  version,  &c.  From  a  large 
amount,  I  make  a  {"ew  extracts. 

P.  432,  on  Gen.  xxxvii.  35,  the  word  sheol,  in  Hebrew,  is 
said  to  be  used  indifferently  both  for  hell  and  the  grave  (turn 
ad  infernum  quam  ad  sepulchrum);  and  hence  the  words  in* 
fernus  and  «cr>,?,  by  interpreters,  are  often  put  for  the  grave. 
As  employed  here  in  the  Vulgate,  it  is  treated  as  ambiguous, 
and  as  tending  to  establish,  in  the  common  people,  the  fiction 
of  a  limbus,  or  place  of  purgatory.  A  host  of  authorities  are 
presented,  in  proof  of  the  grave  being,  with  scarce  an  excep- 
tion, the  appropriate  meaning  of  sheol.  More  to  the  same 
effect  is  given  at  p.  578,  on  Numb.  xvi.  33,  and  at  p.  665, 
Job  xiv.  14;  where  we  are  told,  that  "hie  et  quamplurimis 
insuper  locis  ubi  in  latino  est  in  fernus,  in  Belgic.  Helle,  in 
Ebrceo  esse  Sx^',  qute  vox  etiam  sepulchrum  significat."  Also 
see  p.  677,  Job  xxiv.  19,  and  Ps.  Ixxxv.  18,  with  final  re- 
marks at  p.  894,  on  the  fraudulent  translation  of  the  Vul- 
gate. 

I  shall  merely  add,  that  Rauppius,  in  his  "Commentarium 
Synopticum,"  1665,  in  almost  every  place  of  the  Scriptures  in 
which  the  word  sheol  is  employed,  regards  its  most  appro- 
priate meaning  to  be  the  grave. 

Bishop  Newton's  57th  and  60th  Dissertations,  in  the  6th 
vol.  of  his  works,  London,  1767;  and  Bishop  Hobart's  "State 
of  the  Departed,"  are  worthy  of  consideration ;  and  the  fol- 
lowing, from  Sterne  (Koran,  p.  152),  gives,  in  few  words,  the 
full  idea  of  the  subject.     He  is  speaking  of  the  importance  of 


49 

the  number  three,  and  adds,  "  This  leads  me  naturally  to 
hades,  or  ades,  the  old-fashioned  region  of  distribution,  ac- 
cording to  our  good  or  bad  deeds.  It  consisted  of  three  pro- 
vinces, Erebus,  Tartarus,  and  Elysium — heaven,  hell,  and 
purgatory." — This  is  a  concise  view  of  the  precise  acceptation 
of  hades,  of  which  hell  constitutes  a  "province;"  but  not  that 
province  to  which,  under  the  name  of  paradise,  our  Saviour 
went,  and  to  which  also  the  penitent  thief  was  to  accompany 
him. 

We  trust  that  sufficient  authority  has  thus  been  afforded,  to 
place  the  object  we  had  in  view  fully  before  the  reader,  viz. 
the  utter  impropriety  of  that  part  of  the  third  article  of  our 
church  wherein  it  is  affirmed  that  Christ  descended  into  hell, 
and  that,  as  introduced  into  the  Apostles'  creed,  it  is  to  be 
firmly  believed,  as  being  capable  of  proof  from  the  Scriptures. 
We  think  it  is  adequately  shown,  that  whether  ades  or  sheol 
be  assumed  as  the  ground  of  argument,  both  are  equally  un- 
founded, when  taken  as  the  representatives  of  our  vernacular 
term  of  hell,  and  diametrically  opposed  to  the  paradise  of  St. 
Luke.  If  the  facts  and  arguments  adduced  have  any  weight, 
they  may  perhaps  lead  to  some  change  or  modification  in  the 
parts  assumed  to  be  erroneous,  that  may  prove  acceptable  to 
all  who  may  coincide  in  opinion  with  the  writer. 


REMARKS  ON  PHRENOLOGY, 

In  its  Connexion  until  the  Soul ;  and  as  to  the  Existence  of 
a  Soul  in  Brutes,  Read  before  the  Phrenological  So- 
ciety of  Philadelphia,  in  1822, 


The  following  essay  is  not  given  to  the  public  at  this  late  date  from 
the  period  of  its  delivery  before  the  Phrenological  Society,  when  the 
subject  was  comparatively  unknown  here,  and  almost  universally  de- 
rided, with  any  view  of  affording  instruction  in  the  science ;  for  since 
that  time,  by  the  learned  lectures  and  writings  of  Dr.  Coombe  and 
others,  its  value  has  become  properly  appreciated.  It  is  chiefly  in- 
tended to  point  out,  that  few  sciences  are  of  anterior  standing;  and 
that  long  before  Gall  and  Spurzheim  undertook  to  maintain  its  right- 
ful claim  to  rank  amongst  them,  it  had  received  a  very  extensive 
consideration  amongst  medical  and  other  writers,  of  which  the  facts 
herein  adduced  will  be  deemed  sufficient  proof. 


The  use  of  any  part  of  the  body  in  a  due  and  appropriate 
degree,  is  admitted  universally  to  favour  its  improvement,  both 
as  to  health  and  vigour,  and  in  the  perfection  of  its  functional 
duties.  The  arms  of  the  blacksmith  have  their  muscles  vastly 
augmented  in  size  and  strength,  by  daily  employment  of  the 
ponderous  sledge-hammer;  the  dexterity  of  the  artisan  is  ac- 
quired by  constant  habit,  and  his  skill  in  his  profession  thereby 
improved.  If  this  be  the  fact  in  relation  to  merely  mechanical 
manipulations,  can  it  with  reason  be  presumed  that  the  facul- 
ties of  the  mind  should  remain  stationary,  when  they  are  sub- 


5J 

jected  to  a  like  activity?  Memory,  each  one  perceives  to  be 
invigorated  by  exercise ;  nor  is  the  imagination  of  the  poet 
less  vividly  excited  and  expanded  by  proper  culture,  although 
the  adage  even  of  "Poefa  nascitur,  non  fit,"  should  be  granted 
to  him.  Crime  itself  improves  by  habit,  and  the  propriety  of 
an  early  and  virtuous  education  is  established  by  the  maxim, 
that  "nemo  fuit  repente  turpissimus."  The  whole  train  of  the 
faculties,  emotions  and  passions  of  the  mind,  appear  to  owe 
their  extension,  whether  for  good  or  evil,  to  their  continued* 
action  under  the  influence  of  a  good  or  bad  education,  con- 
-formably  to  what  is  learned  in  the  nursery,  "just  as  the  twig 
is  bent,  the  tree  inclines."  It  would  seem  impossible  to  con- 
ceive of  these  and  other  improvements  taking  place,  with  no 
commensurate  increase  of  vigour  in  those  parts  respectively, 
by  means  of  which  they  are  rendered  apparent.  Whilst,  then, 
the  due  exercise  of  the  mind  tends  to  the  improvement  of  those 
organs  in  which  it  is  located,  or  through  which  its  actions  are 
rendered  effective,  must  it  not  be  conceded  that  such  improve- 
ment in  the  organs  will  cooperate  in  giving  energy  to  the 
mind,  and  thereby  evidence  the  mutual  necessity  of  each  to 
the  other?  and,  like  the  motto  of  our  own  vast  empire,  the 
soul  and  body  may  declare,  "  United  we  stand,  divided  we 
fall." 

The  regular  employment  of  the  senses,  with  which  it  has 
pleased  our  Maker  to  endow  us,  adds  much  to  their  respective 
improvement.  If  unduly  or  inordinately  exercised,  deteriora- 
tion ensues.     The  absence  or  loss  of  one,  is  in  a  measure 

*  The  result  of  habit  in  improving  the  operations  of  man,  is  thus 
defined  by  Aristotle,  in  his  fourteenth  problem— "  Consuetudinem 
definit  Aristoteles,  quod  sit  habitus,  seu  qualitas  ex  frequenti  actione 
et  passione  impressa,  propterquam  promptius  et  diutius  et  cum  de- 
lectatione  operantur,  et  minus  patiuntur." — Galen  has  written  a  book 
expressly,  "  de  consuetudine,"  and  Hippocrates  has  not  been  alto- 
gether silent  on  the  subject. 


52 

compensated  through  the  medium  of  one  or  more  of  the  re- 
mainder, although  they  never  can  fully  supply  the  deficiency. 
The  fact  of  the  eye  supplying  the  want  of  the  sense  of  hear- 
ing, is  familiar  to  all,  in  the  cases  of  the  deaf  and  dumb.  The 
want  of  sight  is  partially  rectified  by  the  sense  of  hearing  and 
of  touch ;  and  even  the  conjoined  loss  of  both  hearing  and  of 
sight,  has,  in  a  very  considerable  measure,  been  overcome  by 
the  sense  of  touch;  but  in  all  such  instances,  with  increase  of 
action  of  the  organs  in  which  those  senses  are  located,  in  vain 
may  we  anticipate  it,  if  the  intercommunication  is  cut  off  be- 
tween the  external  organ  and  the  sensorium.  Perfect  as  may 
be  the  organ  of  sight  in  all  its  parts,  and  vision  resulting 
therefrom  of  the  highest  character,  the  simple  division  of  the 
optic  nerve,  all  else  remaining  as  before,  effectually  shuts  out 
the  light  of  day,  and  of  every  external  object,  which  now  can 
only  be  enjoyed  by  an  act  of  reminiscence,  or  through  the  in- 
direct medium  of  another  sense. 

These  and  similar  facts  necessarily  led  to  the  conclusion, 
that  the  brain  was  the  actual  source  or  seat  of  thought  and 
sensation;  and  although  it  surpasses  our  limited  power  of  re- 
search to  point  out  the  precise  part  in  which  either  thought  or 
sensation  might  be  supposed  to  originate,*  yet  endeavours 
have  been  made  to  trace  the  nerves  to  their  origin,  with  which 
such  a  mysterious  influence  was  presumed  to  be  associated. 
But  whatever  may  be  affirmed  as  to  their  apparent  origin,  no 
one  can  confidently  assure  us  of  its  absolute  certainty,  or  that 

*  It  does  not  appear  that  the  brain  has  been  invariably  considered 
to  be  the  seat  of  the  soul.  In  the  "  Excerpta  Gemarae,"  I.  cap.  9, 
p.  1016,  the  nose  is  stated  as  its  location;  for  in  Gen.  vii.  22,  it  is 
written,  "  Omne  cujus  in  nasibus  halilus  erat  aniniac  vitalis." 

Tertullian  considered  the  soul  to  be  immortal,  but  that  it  was  cor- 
poreally propagated.  Some  supposed  the  soul  to  be  corrupted  as  the 
body  became  so;  and  the  Gnostics  of  old  taught  that  brutes  were  ca- 
pable of  reason,  &c. 


53 

the  anatomical  knife  has  tended  to  demonstrate  the  commence- 
ment of  their  course.  Far  too  imperfect  is  our  vision,  even 
when  aided  by  the  microscope,  to  trace  the  cords  of  ViCe  be- 
yond a  Hmited  extent  in  the  dead  body;  whilst,  in  the  Hving, 
such  attempt  would  be  equally  unavailing,  since  it  would  de- 
stroy that  living  principle  on  which  their  perfection  depends ; 
and  could  we  even  trace  them  to  their  ultimate  point,  we 
should  no  more  comprehend  their  mysterious  connexion  with 
the  soul,  than  we  do  at  present. 

If  such  difficulties  attend  our  researches  on  points  appa- 
rently within  our  reach,  how  far  greater  must  they  be,  v/hen 
connected  with  inquiries  as  to  the  intellectual  faculties  them- 
selves !  dependent  for  their  existence  on  the  agency  of  some 
mysterious  and  inappreciable  cause,  but  which  is  active  or 
efficient,  alone,  through  the  intermedium  of  materiality  in 
corporeal  organization!  The  soul,  that  emanation  from  the 
Deity,  can  be  at  best  but  very  partially  comprehended  by 
man  in  his  present  imperfect  state.  Of  its  essence,  or  of  its 
mode  of  being,  we  know  absolutely  nothing;  and  speculate  as 
we  may,  it  would  seem  to  be  impossible  to  determine,  by  finite 
wisdom,  whether  it  be  of  an  immaterial  or  material  nature. 
The  endless  disputes  on  this  subject  by  philosophers  and  theo- 
logians, amount  not  to  certainty  on  either  side;  for  it  is  a 
mystery  that  the  Almighty  has  reserved  to  himself,  and  has 
considered  it  inexpedient  to  satisfy  by  a  revelation,  the  rest- 
less and  unbounded  curiosity  of  man.  It  must,  nevertheless, 
be  admitted,  that  the  same  great  Power  that  from  nothing 
called  into  existence  the  fabric  of  the  universe,  and  from  the 
atomic  particles  of  brute  and  inorganic  matter  created  all  the 
living  evidences  of  his  omnipotence,  by  laws  depending  on  his 
pleasure,  in  the  form  and  order  that  we  see  around  us,  varied 
ad  infinitum  to  suit  the  great  and  providential  ends  He  had  in 
view;  that  Power,  unquestionably,  could  invest  the  same  inor- 
ganic matter  with  the  capability  of  ratiocination  as  well  ag 

e3 


54 

with  life.  What  has  actually  been  the  case  will  never  here  be 
solved;  and  hence  we  may  conclude,  that  they  who  contend 
for  the  materiality  of  the  soul,  may  maintain  such  opinion 
without  being  charged  with  opposition  to  the  wonderful  per- 
fection and  attributes  of  the  Deity.  Material  or  immaterial. 
He  alone  can  destroy  it,  when  once  brought  into  existence — 
for  such  is  the  language  of  Scripture — and,  indeed,  inde- 
pendently of  his  will,  the  smallest  speck  of  matter  is  eternal 
as  himself,  and  indestructible  by  any  means  that  man  can 
employ.  The  utmost  we  can  do  by  art,  is  merely  that  of 
modifying  in  a  slight  degree  its  state  of  existence,  and  that 
solely  by  the  operation  of  laws  established  by  himself,  and 
with  which  our  acquaintance  is  extremely  limited. 

It  might  here  be  a  question  of  metaphysical  inquiry  at  what 
period  of  the  foetal  existence  the  soul  becomes  united  to  the 
body;  and  whether  acephalous  monsters,  deficient  as  they  are 
in  the  brain,  are  yet  possessed  of  this  incomprehensible  agency ; 
but  whatever  our  individual  opinion  may  be  in  this  particular, 
as  it  is  not  essentially  connected  with  the  object  of  this  essay, 
we  pass  it  by ;  and  incidentally  inquire,  whether  the  soul,  as 
such,  dijfers  in  different  subjects  ?  Regarding  it  as  an  emana- 
tion from  the  Deity,  it  appears  to  me  that  the  question  must  be 
answered  in  the  negative.  As  God  is  all  perfect,  reason  would 
dictate  tliat  nothing  short  of  perfection  could  flow  from  him  ;* 

*  "  And  God  saw  every  thing  that  he  had  made  ;  and  behold,  it  was 
very  good.''  Gen,  i.  31.  Surely,  at  this  time  there  could  have  been 
no  original  sin  existing  in  Adam  !  When  David  said,  Ps.  li.  5,  "  Be- 
hold, I  was  shapen  in  iniquity;  and  in  sin  did  my  mother  conceive 
me,"  he  could  not  mean  that  any  original  sin  attached  to  hivi  at  his 
birth,  a  helpless  innocent  being  j  but  his  language  forcibly  expresses 
the  influence  of  that  concupiscence  that  is  inevitably  an  inmate  of  the 
human  race — and  which  is  affirmed  in  the  ninth  article  of  our  church 
by  the  terms  Cfpvrfjiti  T*ey.oi.  How  soon  after  birth,  sin  commences 
its  ravages,  it  would,  perhaps,  be  difficult  to  determine.  Dr.  Adam 
Clarke  affirms  the  souls  of  men  to  differ — which  is  opposed  to  the 


55 

and  hence  that  the  soul  must  be  uniform ;  or  else  it  would  imply 
that  perfection  varied.  Now  it  seems  a  solecism  to  maintain 
such  a  proposition,  if  we  concede  the  soul  to  be  derived  from 
the  sole  source  of  supreme  wisdom,  harmony  and  goodness; 
and  if  this  is  a  legitimate  conclusion,  it  leads  to  the  further 
inquiry  on  what  the  apparent  difference  of  the  minds  of  men 
can  possibly  depend.  Here  it  may  be  perceived,  that  the  prin- 
ciples of  phrenology  begin  to  appear;  and  if  correctly  viewed, 
will  be  found  alone  capable  of  eliciting  a  spark  of  truth  in  the 
elucidation  of  a  fact  so  curious  and  important,  but  which  each 
day's  experience  sufficiently  establishes.  If,  as  above  main- 
tained, the  soul  can  act  (or  render  its  actions  sensible  to  man) 
only  through  the  intermedium  of  material  organization,  and  no 
other  source  or  agency  has,  I  believe,  been  ever  suggested  ;  it 
follows  necessarily,  that  its  actions  must  be  more  or  less  per- 
fect, exactly  in  the  ratio  of  the  greater  or  less  perfection  of 
those  organs  through  which  they  are  developed.  We  might 
as  readily  assent  to  the  perfection  of  a  paralytic  limb,  or  to 
that  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood,  when  the  nerves  or  vessels 
are  injured  or  destroyed,  as  to  believe  that  the  operations  of  the 
mind  should  be  conspicuously  perfect,  when  its  operative  agents 
are  defective  or  wanting.*  The  various  faculties  regarded  as 
innate,  may  truly  exist,  but  their  development  is  precluded  al- 
together or  in  part,  from  the  faulty  or  defective  organization. 
The  soul,  however,  is  still  connected  with  the  body,  and  affords 
full  evidence  of  its  perfection,  in  the  perfect  actions  of  other 
parts,  not  so  deteriorated. 

views  here  supported  ;  if,  however,  he  is  correct,  the  period  of  com- 
mencing sin  in  man,  may  also  differ. 

*  We  might  unquestionably  as  well  accredit  the  ability  of  a  new- 
born infant  to  eat  and  digest  the  most  solid  food  of  perfect  manhood, 
in  the  imperfect  state  of  its  digestive  organs,  as  to  suppose  the  soul 
could  demonstrate  its  highest  powers  and  capabilities  of  ratiocination, 
before  the  corporeal  organization  had  come  to  maturity. 


56 

Man  is  occasionally  born  with  a  defect  in,  or  a  total  want  of 
some  particular  organ  or  part  of  the  body,  and  consequently 
is  in  the  same  degree  precluded  from  performing  the  appro- 
priate actions  of  that  part — is  the  deduction  at  all  unreasonable, 
that  if  the  organs  of  ratiocination  are  defective  or  wanting, 
this  must  equally  be  productive  of  error  in  them,  or  of  a  total 
absence  of  the  influence  their  presence  was  intended  to  elicit  ? 
We  daily  notice  individuals  in  whom  the  defect  in  one  of  the 
external  organs  of  sense,  is  sufficient  to  arrest  the  correspon- 
dent operation  of  the  mind,  which  in  its  perfect  state  it  would 
have  exhibited,  and  that,  notwithstanding  the  due  perfection  of 
every  other  part  of  the  organ  itself,  and  of  the  soul  presiding 
in  its  functions,  and  this  demonstrates  the  absolute  dependence 
of  each  upon  the  other.  What  coJild  the  soul,  however  per- 
fect in  itself,  accomplish  without  such  an  intermedium  with  the 
world  ?  What  could  the  organ  accomplish  if  separated  from 
its  association  with  its  divine  attendant?  A  simple  division  of 
the  nerve  of  intercommunication  between  the  two,  is  sufficient 
to  render  each  as  useless,  as  if  they  had  no  existence.  The 
manifestation  of  the  soul  will  in  vain  be  looked  for ;  in  vain 
are  the  actions  of  the  part  attempted.  A  sense  is  cut  off,  as 
though  it  was  not  present;  and  perfect  as  both  may  be,  exclu- 
sive of  the  simple  division  of  the  nerve,  all  the  foreign  rela- 
tions of  the  world  are  immediately  suspended.  It  is  true,  that, 
as  before  mentioned,  in  cases  of  this  nature,  some  other  sense 
is  called  into  more  active  operation,  and  by  its  means,  indi- 
rectly, the  action  of  the  defective  or  injured  organ  is  in  some 
measure  supplied.  The  blind  are  thus  enabled,  mentally,  to 
see  through  the  ear  and  through  the  sense  of  touch.  The  deaf 
in  like  manner  may  be  said  to  hear  by  means  of  the  eye, — and 
the  want  of  both  hearing  and  seeing,  is  in  a  partial  degree 
compensated  through  the  sense  of  feeling.  If  such  were  not 
the  case,  a  sense  of  deity,  together  with  many  of  the  facul- 
ties and  emotions  of  the  mind  could  never  be  called  into  ope- 


57 

ration,  but  would  remain  dormant,  and  as  if  never  existent. 
The  perfection  of  the  soul  within,  is  hereby  established,  though 
prevented  from  illustrating  itself  through  corporeal  and  appro- 
priate channels. 

In  the  Edinburgh  Philosophical  Journal  for  January  7, 1822, 
some  particulars  are  given  by  Dr.  Butter,  that  may  serve  to 
illustrate  what  is  above  stated;  it  is  the  account  of  a  very  re- 
markable insensibility  or  imperfection  of  the  eye  in  relation  to 
certain  colours,  in  the  person  of  a  son  of  Dr.  Tucker,  nine- 
teen years  of  age.  The  case  is  not  a  solitary  one,  however 
extraordinary.  Similar  instances  are  recorded  in  the  Man- 
chester Memoirs,  and  in  the  67th  and  68th  vol.  of  the  Philos. 
Trans,  of  London.  It  appears  from  that  under  notice,  that 
Mr.  Tucker  discovered  his  inability  to  distinguish  several  of 
the  primitive  colours  from  one  another,  about  two  years  pre- 
ceding; that  he  employed  a  green  in  place  of  orange  in  some 
work  he  was  engaged  in,  and  could  not  credit  his  mistake;  nor 
could  he  distinguish  any  difference  between  threads  of  those 
two  colours,  when  twisted  around  his  fingers.  Many  leading 
or  primitive  colours  he  neither  knows  when  shown  to  him,  nor 
does  he  remember  them  when  pointed  out  to  him.  Orange,  he 
calls  green,  and  green  orange;  red,  he  views  as  brown,  and 
brown  as  red  ;  blue  silk  looks  to  him  like  pink — and  pink  as  a 
light  blue.  The  seven  primitive  colours  are  associated  in  his 
mind  as  follows  :  Red  is  mistaken  for  brown  ;  orange  for  green ; 
yellow,  is  generally  known,  but  sometimes  is  taken  for  orange; 
green  is  mistaken  for  orange,  except  in  grass;  blue  for  pink  ; 
indigo  for  purple,  and  violet  for  purple.  All  these  anomalous 
impressions  were  equally  the  same,  whether  viewing  silk, 
feathers,  or  Syme's  book  of  colours.  Other  remarkable  aber- 
rations were  equally  conspicuous.  It  was  not  the  effect  of 
disease,  for  his  vision  had  been  always  acute  and  otherwise 
perfect.  How  is  this  singular  deviation  from  common  vision 
to  be  explained  ?     Surely  the  soul  could  not  have  been  partially 


58 

imperfect;  and  the  corporeal  organ  of  vision,  so  far  as  could 
be  judged,  seems  to  have  been  in  a  healthy  state.  Some  organic 
modification  must  however  necessarily  have  existed  in  some 
part,  by  which  the  usual  laws  of  the  refraction  of  the  rays  of 
hght  were  altered ;  for  the  faculty  of  vision  seems  perfect  in 
itself— but  was  developed  through  the  medium  of  imperfect 
organization  in  some  of  its  ramifications,  although  inappre- 
ciable by  any  examination  that  could  be  made. 

However  this  may  be  explained,  we  are  led  to  the  conclu- 
sion, that  certain  organs  of  the  brain  may  be  either  altogether 
wanting,  or  may  be  defective  in  different  degrees,  as  is  per- 
ceptible in  situations  more  obvious  and  external.  In  the  first 
case,  the  faculty  or  faculties  of  the  mind,  so  far  as  they  depend 
on  such  a  part,  cannot  be  developed  ;  and  in  the  second,  the 
development  must  be  imperfect,  in  a  commensurate  ratio.  We 
might,  perhaps,  even  go  so  far  as  to  suppose,  that  for  the  full 
perfection  of  any  individual  faculty  of  the  mind,  its  location 
should,  (as  in  the  case  of  corporeal  organs)  be  absolute  and 
fixed,  relatively  to  those  adjoining,  and  that  otherwise  a  dete- 
rioration of  its  operations  would  result.*  Habit  might  rectify 
in  a  measure,  the  imperfection,  but  would  probably  never  com- 
pletely obviate  the  influence  of  original  non-conformity.    Could 

*  What  would  be  the  result,  if  one  of  the  organs  of  the  lower  or 
animal  propensities,  should  be  located  and  manifest  itself  amongst 
those  of  the  higher  or  intellectual  order  ?  Is  it  not  probable  that  this 
might  be  productive  of  ill  consequences  to  the  perfection  of  the  latter? 
In  like  manner,  we  might  imagine  that  tumours  or  other  affections  of 
the  brain,  might  displace  from  its  regular  situation  some  organ,  and  by 
partially  or  totally  destroying  it,  in  a  like  ratio  destroy  its  healthy 
manifestation,  and  its  regular  train  of  associated  motions  with  the 
adjoining  organs.  Like  monstrosities  of  the  body,  such  cases  might 
be  deemed  the  source  of  mental  monstrosity — ascending  even  to  mad- 
ness, &c. ;  and  if  the  idea  be  correct,  perhaps  it  would  help  to  explain 
some  of  the  numerous  and  extravagant  vagaries  which  at  times  spring 
up  in  the  mind  of  man. 


59 

the  external  organs  of  sight  antl  hearing  be  otherwise  than 
injured  by  transposition?  Why  then  should  not  the  appro- 
priate location  of  the  internal  faculties,  be  equally  necessary  to 
their  full  and  perfect  action?  A  departure  from  it,  may  pos- 
sibly explain  some  of  the  apparent  anomalies  in  phrenological 
research,  and  of  the  operations  and  aberrations  of  the  human 
intellect.  If  all  the  organs  essential  to  the  appropriate  func- 
tions of  the  soul  were  invariably  the  same,  and  equally  perfect 
in  form,  size  and  location,  there  ought,  apparently,  to  be  no 
diversity  in  their  functional  performances,  independently  alone 
of  what  might  be  attributed  to  education;  which  coerces  them, 
as  it  were,  from  habit,  to  stronger  action,  and  that  for  good  or 
evil,  according  to  the  character  of  that  instruction.  But  is  it 
not  a  well  established  fact,  that  individuals  of  the  same  family, 
and  educated  alike,  do  differ  most  remarkably  in  disposition, 
and  in  the  capability  of  attaining  information,  or  of  deducing 
conclusions  from  data  founded  on  the  same  basis?  In  fact, 
the  same  discrepancy  in  character,  &c.,  is  equally  conspicuous 
in  the  brute  creations,  both  in  domestic  and  in  savage  life. 

It  has  been  asserted,  in  opposition  to  the  opinions  respecting 
the  truths  of  phrenology,  that  the  brain  has  an  extent  too 
limited,  to  enable  it  to  afford  a  determinate  origin  to  so  vast  an 
assemblage  of  organs,  as  apparently  would  be  required  to  elu- 
cidate the  sources  or  development  of  the  numerous  faculties 
and  propensities  exhibited  by  man  ;  and  at  first,  such  an  asser- 
tion might  be  considered  as .  unanswerable.  But  we  may 
observe,  that  it  is  highly  probable  many  of  them  are  of  a  com- 
pound character  (as  from  the  seven  primitive  colours  all  the 
boundless  variety  of  nature  is  constituted,)  and  that  even  if 
this  is  not  the  case,  who  will  venture  confidently  to  limit  pre- 
cisely the  exact  extent  or  boundary  of  each  or  any  of  them  ? 
When  we  advert  to  the  infinite  minuteness  of  a  mite,  the  ne  plus 
ultra  of  ancient  ideas  as  to  the  bounds  of  animal  existence  in 
this  respect ;  a  mere  speck  in  creation  when  placed  in  com- 


60 

parison  with  the  gigantic  forms  of  the  whale  or  the  elephant, — 
when  we  observe  its  various  movements,  its  progressive  exist- 
ence, and  the  rapidity  of  its  increase  in  numbers;  we  are  led 
at  once  to  admit,  without  difficulty,  that  within  that  diminutive 
frame,  a  vast  assemblage  of  organs  essential  to  its  animal 
life  does  actually  exist,  each  of  which  is  separate  and  distinct 
from  the  other,  both  in  structure  and  in  use ;  yet  all  essential 
to  the  whole,  though  individually,  nay,  collectively,  too  small 
for  investigation.  A  muscular  fabric  there  exists, — a  circu- 
lation of  some  description,  from  which  its  various  parts  are 
formed  and  nourished,  a  digestive  apparatus,  and  possibly  a 
nervous  system,  to  mention  no  more!  to  all  which  is  super- 
added a  principle  of  life,  all  thus  united  in  a  mass  of  matter 
scarcely  capable  of  recognition  by  the  naked  eye;  when  we 
advert  to  these  facts,  we  may  be  led  to  the  conclusion  that  a 
great  extent  of  boundary  is  not  required  by  the  Creator  of  the 
universe  for  the  location  of  any  or  of  all  the  organs  on  which 
the  existence  or  development  of  the  faculties  may  depend. 
And  if  we  should  extend  this  consideration  to  a  glance  at  those 
animalculse,  known  to  us  only  through  microscopic  observations, 
the  difficulty  increases,  although  the  facts  are  at  once  admitted 
by  the  inquirer  after  truth  into  those  mysteries  of  nature.  So 
far  then,  from  minuteness  being  an  insuperable  obstacle  in 
phrenological  research,  it  rather  tends  to  strengthen  it,  and  will 
lead  to  the  admission,  that  the  brain  is  of  sufficient  extension 
to  aflbrd  ample  origin  to  all  the  organs  of  sense  and  of  ratio- 
cination, even  if  ten  times  more  diversified  than  they  are  con- 
sidered to  bo. 

So  far  as  I  can  perceive,  revelation  has  unfolded  to  us  no- 
thing definitively,  by  which  imperfect  reason  can  venture  to 
pronounce  with  certainty  as  to  the  nature  of  the  soul ;  that  is, 
and  ever  has  been  a  contested  point  between  metaphysicians, 
and  in  all  probability  ever  will  be,  until  the  mystery  is  unfolded 
in  a  future  state  of  existence.     Since  minds  of  equal  eminence 


61 

have  contested  as  to  its  materiality  or  immateriality,  I  am 
satisfied  to  await  tliat  event  in  order  to  arrive  at  its  certain  de- 
velopment.    I  am  led,  however,  to  draw  the  inference,  that  as 
it  has  been  left  undecided  by  the  Great  Author  of  its  existence 
a  mere  speculative  opinion  on  either  side  of  the  question,  and 
which  a  divine  revelation  would  have  eflectually  obviated,  can- 
not be  justly  considered  in  opposition  to  the  strictest  principles 
of  religion ;  and  consequently  that  the  subject  is  not  less  appro- 
priate to  the  exercise  of  the  faculties  implanted  in  us  by  our 
Creator,  than  that  of  any  other  of  a  metaphysical  and  mys- 
terious nature.     Could  we  possibly  comprehend'it,  it  would  not 
be  found  opposed  to  truth,  which  must  always  be  in  unison 
with  a  just  philosophy,  however  repugnant  to  early  imbibed 
and  preconceived  opinions.     All  would  lead  to  the  salutary 
confirmation  of  the  absolute  dependance  of  man  on  his  Creator 
in  every  possible  respect  in  which  he  can  be  viewed.     I  cannot, 
with  these  impressions,  therefore  believe,  that  every  one  who 
accredits   the   materiality   of  the   soul,    is  necessarily  to  be 
esteemed   either   an   atheist   or   an   infidel.       Neither   can  I 
imagine  that  the  salvation  of  mankind  is  at  all  connected  with 
the  views  that  may  be  had  thereon ;  for  were  this  the  case, 
the  truth  would  have  been  most  clearly  pointed  out,  equally 
with  those  duties  we  owe  respectively  to  God  and  to  our  neigh- 
bours— among  which  charity  stands  preeminent,  in  place  of 
anathema,  imprisonment  and  death  !* 

*When  we  speak  of  materiality,  allusion  is  always  had  to  the  con- 
stituent and  diversified  objects  of  creation  that  we  see  around  us. 
Now,  what  do  we  actually  know  of  all  this  ?  The  ancients  talked  of 
four  elements  as  the  basis  of  the  world.  How  stands  that  theory  now  ? 
A  few  years  ago,  the  earths  and  alkalies  were  regarded  as  elementary. 
How  as  to  that  in  the  present  more  enlightened  age  ?  Philosophy  noio 
teaches  that  there  are  some  forty  or  fifty  elementary  constituents. 
How  will  this  hold  one  hundred  years  hence  ?  What  do  we,  in  fact, 
know  of  any  thing  around  us  ^    A  few  apparently  (but  not  all  fully) 

F 


62 

Be  its  nature  as  it  may,  we  do  perceive,  in  its  presence  within 
us,  something  that  approximates  us  to  the  Deity,  requiring, 
however,  the  cooperation  of  [secondary  causes ;  that  is,  a  most 
wonderful  organization  of  vitalized  material  particles,  all  de* 
rived  from  brute  and  inorganic  matter  directly  or  remotely, 
to  render  the  operations  of  the  soul  sensible  and  effective* 
Through  the  agency  of  certain  external  organs  of  sense,  im^ 
pressions  are  received  and  conveyed  to  the  sensorium,  pro- 
ductive there,  of  effects  varying  according  to  the  nature  of  the 
recipient.  These  give  rise  to  the  varied  operations  of  the  mind 
or  soul,  which,  without  the  cooperation  of  the  external  senses^ 
could  never  give  evidence  of  its  existence. 

Now  a  slight  extension  of  these  views  will  probably  lead  us 
to  acquiesce  in  an  opinion  maintained  by  many  writers,  that 
animals  inferior  to  man,  are  likewise  possessed  of  that  prin- 
ciple or  essence  called  a  soul. 

Why  is  man  defined  to  be  a  reasonable  or  reasoning  animal  ? 
It  is  because  he  can  reason  from  cause  to  effect,  and  can  trace 
effects  to  causes;  because  he  possesses  the  passions  of  love, 
hope,  fear,  &c.;  and  especially  because  he  possesses  that  most 
important  faculty  of  memory.  Rut  if  this  be  the  case,  can 
any  one  deny  to  inferior  animals,  whom  we  choose  to  desig- 
nate by  the  name  of  brutes,  many,  or  all  of  the  above  quali- 
ties or  passions,  or  of  the  faculty  or  power  of  memory  ?    The 

established  principles,  which  in  a  short  time  may  be  possibly  over^ 
thrown,  to  make  place  for  others,  that  in  turn  will  afford  amusement 
to  the  philosopliers  of  a  future  period  !  Are  we  warranted  to  be  intole- 
rant to  each  other  on  speculative,  metaphysical  and  mysterious  contro- 
yersies,  whilst  absolutely  ignorant  of  the  nature  of  that  tangible 
matter  that  forms  both  brute  and  animated  nature  ?  And  I  may  further 
ask,  whatever  be  the  cliaracter  and  properties  of  matter,  here  on 
earth — may  not  the  same  great  Architect  employ  in  another  state  of 
existence,  materials  altogether  different  from  them,  and  impressed  by 
laws  distinct  from  those  that  govern  the  systems  of  this  material  uni- 
terse  ? 


63 

dog,  our  familiar  associate,  will  sufficiently  answer  such  denial. 
Acute  and  sensible,  alive  to  friendship  and  affection,  he  appears 
on  many  occasions  to  reason  from  causes  to  their  effects,  and 
from  a  dread  of  punishment,  he  seems  equally  to  retrace  his 
ideas  back  to  the  causes  that  led  to  it  on  former  occasions,  and 
wisely  therefore  he  avoids  their  repetition. 

The  faculty  or  power  of  reasoning,  seems  to  result  from  a 
combination  of  ideas.  The  man  who  is  persuaded  of  the  ex- 
istence of  a  Supreme  Being,  is  led  by  a  train  of  reasoning  to 
view  him  in  the  wonders  of  creation;  and  by  a  train  not  much 
dissimilar,  the  dog  is  kept  in  awe  of  that  punishment,  which 
memory  informs  him  was  inflicted  for  such  or  such  a  fault,  and 
which  reflection  or  association  of  ideas  leads  him  to  anticipate 
a  renewal  of,  on  a  repetition  of  the  same.  How  evidently  too, 
does  he  express  the  emotions  or  passions  of  joy  or  sorrow,  of 
hope,  fear,  anger,  shame,  &c.,  according  to  the  varied  situation 
in  which  he  may  be  placed  ;  can  man  describe  them  by  actions 
more  expressive  ?  Now,  if  these  propositions  are  correct,  must 
they  not  confirm  what  is  above  sustained,  that  animals  do  pos- 
sess, in  varied  degrees,  like  man,  those  mental  affections  on 
which  the  latter  sets  so  high  an  estimate,  and  that  memory 
forms  the  basis  of  such  powers,  by  which,  through  appro- 
priate organs,  their  existence  is  developed? 

If  then  it  is  admitted,  that  all  which  the  superiority  of  man 
enables  him  to  accomplish,  is  the  result  of  reason;  it  must  be 
conceded  that  animals,  who  evince  by  similar  proofs  that  they 
can  reason  in  a  similar  manner,  although  inferior  in  degree, 
and  that  they  are  susceptive  of  similar  impressions;  must  owe 
such  powers  to  a  similar  cause  as  that  through  which  they 
are  produced  in  man  ;  and  that  the  latter  excels  him  in  the 
exact  ratio  in  which  the  effects  and  operations  of  the  powers 
of  ratiocination  are  superior  in  number  and  degree. 

These  remarks  lead  us  back  to  a  further  consideration  of 
that  interesting  subject,  the  quality  or  nature  of  the  soul,  which, 


64 

although  I  regard  it  as  being  altogether  mysterious  and  beyond 
our  comprehension,  yet  I  have  ventured  to  speak  of  it  as  not 
incompatible  on  that  account  with  metaphysical  investigation, 
which  in  every  particular  owes  its  existence  to  the  inquiries  as 
to  this  unknown  agent,  whatever  maybe  its  essence  or  charac- 
ter. The  power  of  ratiocination  being  shown  to  exist  in  ani- 
mals, though  inferior  to  that  of  man,  and  such  power  in  man 
being  uniformly  ascribed  to  the  presence  of  a  soul,  it  seems  a 
legitimate  and  necessary  consequence,  that  we  should  attri- 
bute a  similar  power  in  animals  to  a  like  agency.  If  then  we 
maintain  the  immateriality  of  the  human  soul,  we  must  un- 
questionably invest  that  of  animals  with  the  same  quality.  It 
appears  the  inevitable  consequence  of  the  preceding  data;  for 
so  closely  do  the  powers  of  ratiocination  in  brutes  resemble 
those  of  man,  so  deducible  are  they  from  a  similar  source; 
that  what  the  one  is,  of  such  like  character  and  nature  must 
be  the  other;  unless  we  most  unphilosophically  and  unrea- 
sonably attempt  to  establish  two  principles  to  effect  one  and  the 
same  result ! 

But  on  the  contrary,  should  we  contend  that  all  the  sagacious 
actions  of  brutes  are  the  result  of  mere  corporeal  organization 
alone,  and  altogether  unconnected  with  an  essence  so  divine  as 
that  of  a  soul ;  then,  as  the  superiority  of  man  depends  entirely 
on  his  preeminence  in  the  same  power  of  ratiocination,  it 
would  seem  to  follow,  that  such  superiority  may  equally  arise 
from  a  corresponding  superiority  of  corporeal  organization. 
Are  we  at  all  acquainted  with  the  absolute  refinement  of  which 
matter  is  susceptible?  And  refined  it  must  be  in  an  exquisite 
degree,  if  the  rational  actions  of  brutes  are  dependent  upon  it. 
We  have  above  demonstrated  the  infinite  tenuity  of  matter  in 
the  mite  and  microscopic  animals,  and  in  mere  brute  and  in- 
organic matter  we  may  perceive  an  equal  diversity — as  for 
instance,  in  comparing  the  amount  of  matter  contained  (by 
mere  affinity  of  aggregation  of  which  we  know  as  little  as  we 


65 

do  of  the  soul  itself)  in  a  cubic  inch  of  gold,  with  the  same 
bulk  of  hydrogen  gas ;  calculation  will  demonstrate  the  dif- 
ference to  be  as  100,000  to  1.  Even  this  is  trifling,  if  we 
take  the  odorous  particles  emanating  from  a  grain  of  musk, 
diffusing  themselves  over  a  vast  space  for  weeks  or  months, 
without  any  appreciable  loss  of  weight  in  the  musk  itself — or 
perhaps  the  yet  more  attenuated  matter  of  contagion,  which, 
whatever  it  be,  is  probably,  nay,  we  may  say,  certainly  of  a 
compound  nature,  and  consequently  composed  of  matter  yet 
more  attenuated  ;  or,  in  fine,  compare  the  matter  of  light,  an 
atom  of  which  is  small  enough  to  penetrate  the  dense  cornea 
of  the  organ  of  vision,  and  the  still  denser  medium  of  the 
diamond;  yet  it  is  itself,  if  our  philosophy  of  light  is  true,* 
compounded  of  seven  distinct  and  separable  particles ! — and 
then  we  shall,  perhaps,  be  obliged  to  acknowledge  that  we 
know  but  little  about  the  whole  subject.  Because  we,  with 
profound  arrogance,  have  thought  it  expedient  to  give  to  inani- 
mate matter  the  name  of  brute,  inert,  &c.,  must  we,  therefore, 
deem  it  absolutely  impossible  to  be  so  modified  by  its  divine 
Creator,  that  it  could  be  rendered  capable  of  perception  and  of 
thought !  when  we  see  on  all  sides,  and  in  ourselves,  this  very- 
matter,  brute  and  inactive,  and  inorganic  as  it  once  was,  through 
the  energy  of  Omnipotence,  vivified,  and' combined  in  organs 
replete  with  sensibility,  and  fitted  as  a  receptacle  for  the  habi- 
tation of  that  yet  more  wonderful  accompaniment,  a  soul ! 
The  immaterial ist  who  thus  argues,  confutes  himself,  for  he 
cannot  conceive  mere  abstract  matter  to  be  so  exquisitely 
modified  as  to  give  intelligence  to  brutes,  without  granting  at 
the  same  time,  that,  however  effected,  it  is  of  a  character,  in 
all  respects,  similar  to  the  power  that  actuates  himself. 

Am  I  wrong  in  supposing  the  opinions  of  those  who  main- 

*Dr.  Franklin  says  ''  I  am  much  in  the  dark  about  light;"  yet  he 
was  a  profound  and  enlightened  philosopher. 

f2 


66 

tain  the  immateriality  of  the  soul,  and  affirm  the  absolute  im» 
possibility  of  its  material  existence,  without  being  able  to  de- 
monstrate  from  positive  revelation  on  either  side  of  the  ques- 
tion, by  which  its  peculiar  essence  may  be  fully  established; 
am  I  wrong,  I  repeat,  in  presuming  that  opinion  to  be  chiefly 
based  on  the  immortality  of  this  incomprehensible  associate  of 
material  existence?  Independently  of  the  conviction  enter- 
tained by  them  that  mere  matter  is  incapable  of  being  ren- 
dered qualified  for  ratiocination,  the  opinion  is  supposed  to  be 
strengthened  by  the  declaration,  that  the  world  and  its  con- 
tents are  to  be  ultimately  destroyed  by  fire,  and,  consequently, 
that  the  soul,  if  material,  would  be  therein  comprehended. 
Yet  in  opposition  to  the  direct  and  plain  expressions  of  St. 
Paul,  they  do  not  hesitate  to  maintain  the  resurrection  of  the 
same  identical  body  that  is  deposited  at  death  in  the  grave.— 
Why  is  it  not  to  partake  of  the  like  destruction  with  all  other 
matter  in  this  closing  catastrophe?  But  the  great  apostle 
speaks  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  not  of  the  bodt; — and 
every  where,  in  so  doing,  especially  in  1  Cor.  xv.  he  seems 
clearly  to  shut  out  every  idea  that  could  lead  to  the  popular 
belief,  and  in  words  so  explicit,  that  they  cannot  be  set  aside 
by  the  sophistry  of  a  vague  and  self-sufficient  philosophy. 

"How  are  the  dead  raised,"  asks  St.  Paul,  "and  with  what 
body  do  they  come?"  "Thou  fool,"  (adds  he,  as  if  antici- 
pating the  disputes  that  have  since  arisen  on  the  subject) 
"Thou  fool,  thou  sowest  not  that  body  that  shall  be;'''  and 
following  up  his  argument,  he  adds,  "  So  also  is  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead;  it  is  sown  in  corruption,  it  is  raised  in  incor- 
ruption ;  it  is  sown  a  natural  body,  it  is  raised  a  spiritual 
body : — and  I  say  unto  you,  that  flesh  and  blood  cannot  in- 
herit the  kingdom  of  God ;  neither  doth  corruption  inherit  in- 
corruption;  we  shall  all  be  changed — the  dead  shall  be  raised 
incorruptible,  and  we  shall  be  changed."  If  these  words  are 
true,  and  who  can  doubt  them,  where  do  we  find  a  trace  of 


67 

the  same  body  in  which  life  is  brought  to  a  close?  What,  in 
fact,  would  be  the  inevitable  result  of  such  an  event?  Would 
not  heaven  be  peopled  with  every  variety  of  disease  whereby 
existence  had  been  terminated?  In  place  of  beauty  and  com- 
plete perfection,  on  all  sides  we  should  encounter  the  most  dis- 
gusting objects!  "Plague,  pestilence  and  famine,"  cancer, 
ulcers  of  every  variety,  leprosy,  dropsy,  decrepitude,  with 
madness  and  monstrosities  of  all  descriptions! — Are  such  to 
be  the  inmates  of  the  New  Jerusalem?  No!  "We  all  are 
changed  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye."  The  bodies  there, 
whatever  be  their  nature  and  the  change  alluded  to,  are  not 
those  that  here  invested  the  immortal  spirit,  formed  in  the 
image  of  its  Maker ;  and  although  the  expressions  of  the 
apostle  are  at  present  wrapt  in  mystery  for  us,  they  yet  pro- 
claim the  all-important  doctrine  of  a  resurrection  !*  But  to 
leave  this  digression, — 

*  The  following  extract  from  a  sermon  of  the  Rev.  Paul  H.  Maty, 
is  given  in  a  review  of  his  book  (Analyt.  Rev.  3,  p.  32,  1789),  as  his 
"  Objections  to  the  resurrection  of  the  same  hody,"  which  the  re- 
viewer adds,  "  are  argumentative  and  philosophically  conclusive : 
they  are,  perhaps,  as  well  stated  as  in  any  part  of  the  controversies 
on  that  subject." 

"  The  Deists  (says  he)  would  not  attempt  to  contradict  the  particu- 
lar  fact  (the  resurrection  of  Christ)  if  we  did  not  make  use  of  it  to 
prove  a  general  proposition — 'As  in  Adam  all  die,  so  in  Christ  shall 
all  be  made  al've.'  This  is  what  he  rejects  with  disdain;  and,  it 
must  be  owned,  he  would  do  it  with  reason  too,  if,  instead  of  resting 
satisfied  with  what  has  been  taught  us  by  the  evangelists  and  apos- 
tles, we  should  adopt  the  reveries  and  baseless  superstructures  of 
modern  philosophers.  If,  for  instance,  we  should  pretend  our  bodies 
will  be  exactly  the  same  at  the  resurrection  as  they  are  now;  how  is 
it  possible  thoy  should  be  exactly  the  same  .' — What  size,  what  shape, 
what  dimensions  could  a  man  have,  if  all  the  atoms  that  at  separate 
times  have  entered  into  his  composition,  were  collected  into  one 
mass.^  Is  the  world,  or  even  the  universe,  large  enough  to  supply  its 
assembled  inhabitants,  of  all  ages,  with  matter  ?     How  can  it  be  pos- 


68 

Should  it  be  urged  that  corporeal  organization,  although 
capable  of  being  wrought  up  to  that  exquisite  degree  that  is 
perceptible  in  the  action  of  brutes,  is  yet  incapable  of  that 
higher  degree  of  intellect  perceptible  in  man ;  and  that  he  re- 
quires the  addition  of  an  immaterial  essence,  called  a  soul,  in 
order  to  produce  the  difference  perceived  between  them;  it 
may  be  replied,  that  to  argue  thus  is  to  determine  by  our  finite 
conceptions,  what  infinite  Omnipotence  and  wisdom  is  able  to 
accomplish,  and  to  affirm  positively,  the  precise  extent  to  which 
the  Almighty  can  go,  in  modifying  that  matter  which  he  Him- 
self created.  Moreover,  it  tends  to  establish  an  additional 
principle,  by  whatever  name  it  may  be  called,  when,  for  aught 
we  know,  and  indeed  from  all  we  may  justly  infer  from  all 
around  us,  one  alone  is  quite  suflicient.  It  is,  apparently, 
self-evident,  that  if  the  Almighty  can  so  modify  inert  and 
senseless  matter  as  to  render  it  susceptive  of  life  and  of  rational 
perceptions  and  actions  in  brutes  to  a  limited  degree;  we  can 
have  no  cause  to  deny  to  his  omnipotence,  the  ability"  still 
more  exquisitely  to  modify  that  matter,  so  as  to  render  it 
capable  of  the  far  superior  acts  of  ratiocination  that  are  con- 
spicuous in  man.  "  Must  every  thing  be  impossible  that  our 
insufficiency  cannot  account  for  ?  Are  there  not  innumerable 
mysteries  in  nature  which  accident  reveals,  or  experimental 
philosophy  demonstrates  to  us  daily?     And  shall  we  yet  pre- 


sible  that  elements  which  have  passed  successively  through  many 
bodies,  should  at  the  same  time  resume  their  places  in  each  of  them  ? 
Who  should  adjudge  the  particle,  which,  like  the  wife  mentioned  in 
the  Gospel,  has  not  only  belonged  to  seven,  but  to  seventy  times 
seven  proprietors?  The  ground  is  not  tenable  }  thank  heaven,  then, 
that  we  are  not  obliged  to  defend  it;  let  us  repair  to  the  eminence, 
where,  indeed,  we  shall  be  impregnable;  let  us  assert  with  St.  Paul, 
that,  though  we  shall  not  all  die,  we  shall  be  all  changed ;  that  we 
shall  rise  again  with  bodies,  but  with  different  and  far  more  glorious 
bodies  than  those  we  went  to  sleep  in." 


69 

sume  to  limit  the  power  of  that  Great  Author  of  that  very 
nature?  What  was  it  that  created  matter  ?  What  was  it  that 
gave  that  matter  motion  ?  What  was  it  that  to  that  matter 
and  motion  added  sensation  and  life?  What  was  it  that  super- 
added to  these,  consciousness,  intelligence  and  reflection? 
What  was  it" — but  enough.     Sterne's  Koran,  p.  50. 

Now  if  from  nothing  all  this  has  been  accomplished  by  an 
Almighty  Power,  well  may  we,  as  above,  ask,  "  shall  we  pre- 
sume to  limit  it?"  Does  not  our  Saviour  tell  the  Pharisees, 
(Luke  xix.  40,)  "  if  these  should  hold  their  peace  the  stones 
would  immediately  cry  out?"  Did  He  mean  this  literally? 
It  is  to  be  so  presumed,  for  no  sense  or  meaning  would  other- 
wise appear  to  be  connected  with  an  expression  so  extravagant. 
If  then  power  could  be  thus  given  to  mere  matter  to  speak, 
could  not  that  same  matter  be  rendered  capable  of  ratiocina- 
tion ?* 

The  fact  appears  to  be,  that  we  are  so  tenacious  of  affecting 
to  know  the  utmost  qualities  and  capabilities  of  things,  the 
ne-plus  ultra  of  every  object  of  science,  fluctuating  as  it  ever  has 
been,  that  we  delight  to  circumscribe  the  boundaries  of  Omni- 
potence, and  thereby  to  affix  a  limitation  to  it!  We  pride 
ourselves  moreover,  in  drawing  thus  a  line  of  demarcation  be- 
tween ourselves  and  the  beasts  that  perish,  as  we  are  pleased 
to  say  ;  although  formed  of  like  materials,  and  constituting  in 
fact,  the  chief  intervening  link  between  us  and  inanimate  mat- 
ter. We  cannot  endure  the  idea  of  having  an  organization 
similar  to  that  of  brutes,  by  which  both  they  and  we  are  ren- 
dered capable  of  information;  but  fondly  ascribe  to  ourselves 
a  superior  and  spiritual  essence  which  we  deny  to  them,  con- 
sidering it  impossible  that  any  thing  beneath  an  immaterial 

*  The  miracle  wrought  in  the  Ass,  by  which  he  was  enabled  to  re- 
monstrate  with  his  master  Balaam,  is  assuredly  as  great  as  that  which 
took  place  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 


70 

soul  can  be  productive  of  thought  and  reason  in  so  high  extent 
as  man  evinces,  distinct  in  character  and  operation  from  that 
low  and  mean  intelHgence  which  we  unwiUingly  admit  in 
brutes.  Nor  is  this  aversion  lessened  by  the  persuasion  that 
beasts  will  perish  forever  at  the  termination  of  their  present 
life,  inasmuch  as  the  immaterialty  of  the  soul  is  regarded  as 
the  cause  thar  leads  to  a  future  state  of  endless  duration,  as  if 
that  which  had  a  beginning,  could  not  possibly  be  equally 
destroyed  at  the  fiat  of  its  Omnipotent  Creator!  What  indeed 
are  we  to  infer  from  the  words  of  our  Saviour  himself,  who 
tells  us  to  fear  Him  who  can  destroy  both  soul  and  body  ?  Be 
it  material  or  immaterial,  it  would  then  appear  not  to  be  neces- 
sarily indestructible,  or  the  expression  of  our  Saviour  must 
be  taken  in  some  other  sense  than  that  which  the  literal  mean- 
ing conveys. 

But  the  immortality  of  the  soul  is  not  necessarily  implicated 
with  either  a  material  or  immaterial  character.  In  either 
case,  that  immortality  must  assuredly  depend  on  the  will  of 
its  Maker.  If  material,  nothing  short  of  that  Power  to  which 
it  owes  its  being,  is  capable  of  effecting  its  subsequent  destruc- 
tion. Alike  in  this  respect  with  all  created  matter,  every 
atom  is  eternal  as  Himself,  except  at  His  decree.  Hence  at 
His  pleasure  it  may  be  annihilated;  or  if  compounded  of  some 
of  the  varied  atoms  of  creation,  the  simple  decomposition  or 
separation  of  those  atoms  will  destroy  at  once  the  specific  ag- 
gregation on  which  its  essence  depended.  But  if  it  be  imma- 
terial, which  it  must  be  in  brutes  if  it  is  so  in  man,  still  its 
immortality  will  be  dependent  solely  on  the  will  of  God. 

It  may  bo  incidentally  remarked  in  reference  to  the  in- 
destructibility of  matter  save  by  the  fiat  of  its  Creator,  that  we 
are  told  in  Scripture,  that  the  world  and  all  contained  therein 
is  to  be  destroyed  by  fire.  It  is  not  said  that  it  will  be  anni- 
hilated;  nor  have  we  any  reason  from  revelation  or  otherwise 
to  believe  that  any  particle  of  matter  will  experience  such  a 


n 

/ate.  It  will  perhaps  be  readily  admitted,  from  what  we  knoW 
of  the  agency  of  heat  in  changing  the  forms  of  bodies,  and  by 
overpowering  their  aggregation,  thereby  bringing  their  parti- 
cles into  new  combinations,  that  a  small  increase  of  that  tem- 
perature which  man  even  is  capable  of  producing  by  artificial 
means,  would  amply  suffice  to  destroy  completely  the  aggrega- 
tion of  matters  even  of  such  as  art  has  never  yet  accomplish- 
ed;* and  by  thus  overpowering  the  force  of  attraction,  the 
whole  globe  and  its  contents  would  probably  be  converted 
into  a  gaseous  state  of  chaotic  confusion  similar  to  that  in  which 
it  first  existed,  and  from  which  it  was  withdrawn  by  those 
affinities  that  were  impressed  upon  it  by  Omnipotence.!    Now, 

*  See  an  admirable  communication  "  On  the  physical  facts  con- 
tained in  the  Bible  compared  with  the  discovei'ies  of  modern  sciences," 
by  Marcel  de  Serres,  in  the  Edinb.  Philosophical  Journal, — and  from 
thence  printed  in  Littell's  Living  Age  for  May,  1845 — which  power- 
fully strengthens  the  preceding,  &c. — See  also  an  interesting  paper  by 
M.  Simon  Tyssot,  in  the  12th  Vol.  Journal  Litteraire,  p.  154,  printed  at 
the  Hague,  1723,  12mo.,  in  which  some  bold  speculations  on  the  sub- 
ject of  Creation,  appear  to  forestall  most  of  those  of  the  present  period, 
as  deduced  from  the  Geology  of  the  Earth. 

t  "  Gaseous  State  of  the  Earth. — Though  the  mind,  accustomed 
to  philosophical  inquiries,  may  find  it  difficult  to  comprehend  the  idea 
that  this  planet  once  existed  in  a  gaseous  state,  this  difficulty  will 
vanish  upon  considering  the  nature  of  the  materials  of  which  it  is 
composed  must  constantly  undergo.  Water  offers  a  familiar  example 
of  a  substance  existing  on  the  surface  of  the  globe,  in  the  separate 
states  of  rock,  fluid  and  vapour,  for  water  consolidated  into  ice  is  as 
much  a  rock  as  granite  or  the  adamant;  and  as  we  shall  hereafter 
have  occasion  to  remark,  has  the  power  of  preserving  for  ages  the 
animals  and  vegetables  that  may  be  therein  embedded.  Yet,  upon  an 
increase  of  temperature,  the  glaciers  of  the  Alps,  and  the  icy  pin- 
nacles of  the  arctic  circles,  disappear;  and,  by  a  degree  of  heat  still 
higher,  might  bo  resolved  into  vapour;  and  by  other  agencies  might 
be  separated  into  two  invisible  gases,  oxygen  and  hydrogen.  Metals 
may,  in  like  manner,  be  converted  into  gases;  and  in  the  laboratory 
of  the  chemist,  all  kinds  of  matter  pass  easily  through  every  grade  of 


72 

as  such  laws  were  the  offspring  of  His  will  alone,  should  it 
please  Him  simply  to  suspend  them,  all  action,  whether  chemi- 
cal or  mechanical,  would  be  at  an  end;  and  new  laws,  under 
the  same  Almighty  direction,  would  readily  produce  a  new 
earth,  such  as  we  are  assured  will  be  the  successor  of  that  we 
now  inhabit;  and,  which  may  subserve  the  nature  of  those  spi- 
ritual or  other  beings  who  may  be  assigned  for  its  inhabitants. 
Whilst  apparently,  a  more  simple  view  of  this  catastrophe  than 
that  of  popular  belief,  it  has  the  aspect  of  philosophic  proba- 
bility, which  might  even  lead  us  to  imagine  that  this  earth,  is 
in  fact,  a  renewal  of  a  preceding  one,  which  in  like  manner 
may  have  had  its  predecessors  in  a  regular  and  stated  course, 
under  the  direction  of  the  Divine  Will. 

Recurring  from  this  digression,  we  remark,  that  it  does  not 
seem  a  necessary  consequence,  in  admitting  that  brutes  have 
souls  of  a  nature  somewhat  similar  to  that  of  man,  that  they 
are,  like  his,  invested  with  the  character  of  immortality;  or, 
in  other  words,  that  they  will  not  experience  the  common 
destruction  of  all  created  matter.  If  God  has  been  graciously 
pleased  to  grant  that  high  prerogative  to  man,  it  was  clearly 
optional,  and  subservient  to  His  divine  intentions,  and  equally 
so  to  deny  it  in  the  case  of  brutes.  But  as  nothing  certain  is 
revealed  on  the  subject,  the  affirmative  of  a  future  existence  of 
the  souls  of  brutes  has  been  frequently  and  warmly  maintained 
by  many  humane  and  philanthropic  writers,  under  the  Chris- 
tian as  well  as  under  other  dispensations.*     The  Pythagorean 

transmutation,  from  the  most  dense  and  compact  to  an  aeriform  state. 
We  cannot,  therefore,  refuse  our  assent  to  the  conclusion,  that  the 
entire  of  our  globe  might  be  resolved  into  a  permanently  gaseous 
form,  merely  by  the  dissolution  of  the  existing  combinations  of  matter." 
Mantell's  Wonders  of  Geology. 

*  See  Rush— Medical  Museum,  Vol.  4,  p.  229.  Heartley— History 
of  Man,  Vol.  2,  p.  43G.  Hildrop,  Free  Thoughts,  &c.  Athenian 
Oracle,    Vol.    1.      British   Magazine    and    Review,    Vol.  3,  p.   357. 


73 

transmigration  of  the  soul,  and  all  its  ramifications,  appears  to 
have  had  its  origin  in  this  or  some  analogous  opinion  :  and  when 
we  notice  the  tortures,  privations  and  miseries  of  the  brute 
creation,  arising  from  our  wants  or  from  our  caprices,  we  can 
scarcely  reconcile  it  with  our  ideas  of  the  mercy  and  justice 
of  their  Creator,  if  we  fail  to  accredit  a  future  retribution  for 
their  present  extreme  and  unmerited  sufferings. 

The  following  remarks  of  Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  in  his  Com- 
mentaries on  the  8th  ch.  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Romans,  are  too 
enlightened  and  too  closely  connected  with  this  subject,  to  re- 
quire any  apology  for  their  introduction  here. 

"  THE  restoration  of  the  brute  creation  to  a  state  of  happi- 
ness has  been  thought  by  several  to  be  the  doctrine  of  verses 
19, — 25.  In  the  notes  on  those  verses  I  have  given  reasons 
against  this  opinion;  and  have  proved  that  the  Gentiles  and 
not  the  irrational  part  of  the  creation,  are  the  persons  of  whom 
the  Apostle  speaks ;  nor  can  any  consistent  interpretation  be 
given  of  the  place  if  it  be  applied  to  the  brute  creation.  But 
although  this  doctrine  is  not  contained  in  the  above  verses,  it 


Universal  Magazine,  Vol.  34,  p.  325.  Gentleman's  Magazine,  Vol. 
38,  p.  177.  Cath.  M.  Graham — Letters  on  Education.  Jortin's  Sermon 
on  the  Goodness  of  God. — Universal  History,  Vol.  l,p.  96 — and  many 
others. 

"  There  was  a  book  lately  published,  styled  ^Of  the  Future  Lives  of 
Brutes,'  which  gave  great  offence  to  Divines.  I  cannot  see  why. 
The  only  fault  I  found  with  it  was,  that  it  was  poorly  written.  Is 
there  only  such  a  proportion  of  salvation  in  the  gift  of  Providence, 
that  parsons  need  be  jealous  of  the  participation  ?  To  suppose  the 
inferior  animals  of  creation  to  be  endowed  with  souls,  must  presup- 
pose our  own  to  be  out  of  all  dispute."     Sterne's  Koran,  p.  115. 

The  celebrated  physician  Sennertus,  "  was  accused  of  blasphemy 
and  impiety,  on  pretence  of  having  taught,  that  the  souls  of  beasts 
are  not  material;  for  this  was  affirmed  to  be  the  same  thing  with 
teaching  that  they  are  as  immortal  as  the  soul  of  man."  Biogr.  Dic- 
tionary, Vol.  11.     London,  1784. 

G 


74 

does  not  follow  that  the  doctrine  itself  is  not  true.  Indeed 
there  are  several  reasons  which  render  the  supposition  very 
probable. 

1.  The  brute  creation  never  sinned  against  God;  nor  are 
they  capable  of  it :  and  consequently,  cannot  be  justly  liable 
to  punishment. 

2.  But  the  whole  brute  creation  is  in  a  state  of  suffering ; 
partake  of  the  common  infirmities  and  privations  of  life  as 
well  as  mankind :  they  suffer,  but  who  can  say  that  they  suf- 
fer justly  ? 

3.  As  they  appear  to  be  necessarily  involved  in  the  suffer- 
ings of  sinful  man ;  and  yet  neither  through  their  fault  nor 
their  folly;  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that  the  Judge  of  all  the 
earth,  who  ever  does  right,  will  find  some  means  by  which 
these  innocent  creatures  shall  be  compensated  for  their  suffer- 
ings. 

4.  That  they  have  no  compensation  here,  their  afflictions^ 
labours  and  death  prove :  and  if  they  are  to  have  any  compen- 
sation, they  must  have  it  in  another  state. 

5.  God,  the  fountain  of  all  goodness,  must  have  originally 
designed  them  for  that  measure  of  happiness  which  is  suited 
to  the  powers  with  which  he  had  endowed  them.  But,  since 
the  fall  of  man,  they  never  had  that  happiness :  and,  in  their 
present  circumstances,  never  can. 

6.  As  to  intelligent  beings,  God  has  formed  his  purposes  in 
reference  to  their  happiness,  on  the  ground  of  their  rational 
natures.  He  has  decreed  that  they  shall  be  happy  if  they 
will,  all  the  means  of  it  being  placed  within  their  power;  and 
if  they  be  ultimately  miserable,  it  is  the  effect  of  their  own,  un- 
constrained choice.  Therefore,  His  purpose  is  fulfilled,  either 
in  their  happiness  or  misery  ;  because  he  has  purposed  that 
they  shall  be  happy  if  they  please;  and  that  misery  shall  be 
the  result  of  their  refusal. 

7.  But  it  does  not  appear  that  the  brute  creation  are  incapa- 


75 

ble  of  this  choice ;  and  it  is  evident  that  they  are  not  placed 
in  their  present  misery  through  either  their  choice  or  their  sin; 
hence,  if  no  purpose  of  God  can  be  ultimately  frustrated,  these 
creatures  must  be  restored  to  that  state  of  happiness  for  which 
they  have  been  made ;  and  of  which  they  have  been  deprived 
through  the  transgression  of  man. 

8.  To  say,  that  the  enjoyments  which  they  have  in  this  life, 
are  a  sufficient  compensation,  is  most  evidently  false ;  for,  had 
not  sin  entered  into  the  world,  they  would  have  had  much 
greater  enjoyments,  without  pain,  excessive  labour  and  toil, 
and  without  death ;  and  all  those  sufferings  which  arise  from 
its  predisposing  causes.  Nor  does  it  appear  that  they  have 
much  happiness  from  eating,  drinking  and  rest,  as  they  have 
these  only  in  the  proportion  in  which  they  are  necessary  to 
their  existence  as  the  slaves  of  men.  Therefore,  allowing 
that  they  have  even  gratification  and  enjoyment  in  life,  they 
have  much  less  than  they  would  have  had,  had  not  sin  entered 
into  the  world ;  and,  consequently,  they  have  been  deprived  of 
the  greater  portion  of  the  happiness  designed  for  them  by  their 
bountiful  Creator. 

9.  It  is  therefore  obvious,  that  the  gracious  purpose  of  God 
has  not  been  fulfilled  in  them ;  and,  that  as  they  have  not  lost 
their  happiness  through  their  own  fault,  both  the  beneficence 
and  justice  of  God  are  bound  to  make  them  a  reparation. 

10.  Hence  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude,  that,  as  from  the 
present  constitution  of  things,  they  cannot  have  the  happiness 
designed  for  them  in  this  state,  they  must  have  it  in  another." 

Man  is  said  to  be  made  a  little  lower  than  the  angels;  we 
may  suppose,  in  explanation  of  this,  that  one  or  more  senses 
are  superadded  in  the  last,  to  the  five  that  man  enjoys,  and  if 
so,  what  an  infinitely  superior  range  must  the  faculties  of  the 
angelic  host  necessarily  possess  above  us !  Nor  is  it  at  all 
improbable,  that  such  addition  may  be  allotted  to  us  in  a  future 


76 

state,  in  order  to  raise  us  to  an  equality  with  them.*  In  brutes, 
although  equally  possessed  of  five  senses,  how  then  is  it  that 
such  inequality  exists?  If  in  both  man  and  brute  a  soul  exists 
(material  or  immaterial,  for  what  it  is  in  the  one,  it  must  be  in 
the  other),  with  senses  equal  in  number, — (some  of  which  are 
more  perfect  in  many  animals  than  in  the  human  race;)  why 
must  we  presumptuously  shut  them  out  from  a  future  state,  in 
which  they  might  experience  some  compensation  for  their  un- 
merited sufferings  in  this?  Why  may  not  a  haven  if  not  a 
heaven,  be  reserved  for  them,  accordant  with  their  qualifica- 
tions and  capacity  of  happiness?  What  is  the  apparently 
distinctive  difference  between  them,  that  affords  superiority  to 
man?  If  we  trace  the  faculties  of  each,  we  find  some  pos- 
sessed by  man  which  are  denied  to  brutes, — among  these, 
most  prominently  appears,  a  sense  of  Deity!  It  is  true  that 
a  slight  trace  of  a  moral  faculty  appears  in  brutes,  as  evinced 
by  a  sense  of  shame  on  some  occasions,  quickened  by  the 

*  Tertullian  speaks  of  the  Elysian  fields  as  a  determinate  locality, 
which  is  spoken  of  as  Abraham's  bosom,  &c.;  and  he  asks  "  if  the  souls 
are  not  there  in  expectation  of  the  final  judgment?  and  what  is  their 
state  at  that  time  ?  Shall  we  sleep  then  ?  Amongst  the  living,  the 
soul  does  not  sleep — it  is  for  the  body," — and  Origen,  in  his  7th 
homily  on  Leviticus,  among  other  matters,  when  speaking  of  the 
place  to  which  the  souls  of  the  saints  go  after  death,  says  "  Puto 
quod  Sancti  quique,  discedentes  ex  hac  vita,  permaneant  in  loco  aliquo 
in  terra  posito,  que  paradisum  dicit  scriptura  divina,  velut  in  quodam 
eruditionis  loco,  et  ut  ita  dixerim  adjutorio,  vet  schola.  animaruvi :  in 
quo  de  omnibus  his,  quse  in  terris  viderant,  doceantur,  judicia  quoque 
quaedam  accipiant  de  consequentibus  et  futuris,  sicut  in  hac  quoque 
vita  positi  judicia  que  dat  futurorum,  licet  per  speculum  in  senigmate, 
tamen  ex  aliqua  parte  conciperant,  quce  manifestius  et  lucidius  Sanctis 
in  suis  locis  et  temporibus  revelantur,'*  &c. 

Extracts  from  Bibliotheca  Sancta,  by  Sixtus  Sinensis,  1592.  We 
perceive  that  Origen  has  here  forestalled  some  writers  of  this  period, 
in  respect  to  the  improvement  and  instruction  of  the  soul,  in  its  tem- 
porary abode  between  death  and  the  final  judgment. 


77 

means  of  memory ;  but  of  a  sense  of  Deify ^  no  evidence  exists, 
and  hence  they  are  truly  shut  out  from  all  claims  as  moral 
agents;  and  cannot  be  subject  to  punishment  by  a  benevolent 
Creator  for  actions  uncontrollable  from  such  a  sense,  and  by 
which,  if  they  possessed  it,  they  would  be  led  to  a  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil.  Perfect  then  as  they  may  be,  alike  with 
man  in  the  number  and  integrity  of  their  common  senses,  we 
may  readily  conclude  (and  by  it,  add  strength  to  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  phrenology)  that  no  location  in  their  brain 
is  afforded  to  that  important  faculty,  nor  organ  through  whose 
medium  its  actions  miglit  be  developed.*  Hence  (as  in  idiots) 
the  Deity  unknown,  cannot  be  acknowledged  and  duly  honour- 
ed. A  revelation  of  a  resurrection  and  of  a  future  state,  would 
have  been  useless ;  although  such  a  resurrection  may  ensue, 
and  happiness  enjoyed,  proportioned  to  their  inferior  faculties, 
as  here  displayed. 

The  opinion  of  Dr.  Clarke  above  stated,  must  evidently  be 
associated  with  the  existence  of  some  spiritual  or  immortal 
essence  in  the  brute,  independent  of  the  corporeal  frame,  of 


*  In  days  of  yore,  a  soul  was  supposed  to  exist  not  in  brutes  only, 
but  even  in  plants.  This  was  a  well  received  opinion  among  philoso- 
phers, perhaps  as  wise  as  those  of  present  notoriety, 

"In  plantis  est  tantum  anima  vegetat'iva;  in  brutis  est  tantum 
anima  scnsitiva;  in  hominibus  est  tantum  una  anima,  scilicet  intellec- 
tiva,  in  qua  ceteris  continenter,"  &c.  Margarita  Philosophica,  1508, 
4to.  Lib.  ii.  Chap.  15.  The  good  folks  of  that  distant  period  were 
more  tolerant  than  in  these  enlightened  days.  'Tis  even  stated  in  ch. 
16  of  the  above  work,  when  considering  the  soul  as  a  light,  inclosed 
in  a  lantern  of  horn  or  glass,  which  is  bright  in  proportion  to  the  clear- 
ness and  cleanliness  of  the  inclosure,  though  the  light  itself  inside  is 
unchanged,  that  "In  stultis  igitur  et  fatuis,  anima  rationalis  est: 
cujus  tamen  ob  corporis  indispositionem,  opera  minus  emicant? 
"  Recto,"  replies  the  teacher, — "  Recte,  nam  etsi  intellectiva  organica 
non  sit :  Conjuncta  tamen  corpori,  corporalium  species  per  sensus 
recipit!" 

g2 


78 

which  it  was  the  miserable  tenant.  What  his  particular  views 
in  this  respect  were,  are  not  distinctly  enunciated;  and  the 
extract  is  to  be  received  for  as  much  as  it  is  worth,  in  con- 
nexion with  the  object  of  this  essay,  without  further  enlarge- 
ment.  From  all  that  has  been  said,  without  perplexing  our- 
selves by  additional  remarks  on  the  nature  and  character  of 
the  soul,  it  would  seem  obvious,  that,  without  the  intermedium 
of  corporeal  organs,  it  would  be  to  us,  as  though  it  had  no  ex- 
istence; and  those  organs  must  be  of  a  definite  and  determi- 
nate character;  its  multifarious  actions  of  thought,  word  or 
deed,  depend  entirely  on  the  nature  and  degree  of  perfection  in 
the  respective  organs,  through  which  it  is  manifested; — vision 
accomplished  by  an  action  of  the  soul,  through  the  agency  of 
the  eye  and  its  appendages,  cannot,  by  volition,  be  effected 
through  the  ear,  however  anxious  the  mind  might  be  to  modify 
the  channel  of  its  operation.  The  soul  is,  therefore,  absolutely 
restrained  to  such  actions  alone,  which  the  construction  of  the 
different  organs  is  adapted  to  accomplish ;  and  those  actions 
will  be  in  due  vigour  and  proportion,  just  according  to  their 
healthy  or  imperfect  state.  Could  we  see  as  distinctly,  and 
observe  the  organs  of  the  intellectual  faculties,  with  equal  care 
and  precision,  as  the  more  external  ones  of  sense,  we  probably 
would  entertain  a  more  favourable  impression  as  to  the  doc- 
trines of  phrenology,  if  indeed  it  is  itself  insufficient  to  pro- 
duce conviction  of  its  truth. 

It  may  surely  claim  attention,  and  is  deserving  of  considera- 
tion, why,  if  the  operations  of  the  soul  are  altogether  inde- 
pendent of  corporeal  organization,  why,  nevertheless,  those 
operations  are  perfect,  in  the  ratio  of  the  health  and  perfection 
of  the  organs  and  their  functions.*  Why  should  the}-  decrease 

*  The  organs  of  the  sensorium  or  brain,  numerous  as  they  are  re- 
presented  to  be,  yet  they  all  are  actuated  or  set  in  motion  by  one  mys- 
terious principle — the  soul.  This  principle  of  all  intelligence  may  be 
supposed  to  act  occasionally  through  the  medium  or  instrumentalitj'- 


in  perfection,  exactly  in  the  ratio  in  which,  from  age,  disease 
or  accident,  those  bodily  organs  become  imperfect]     Numer- 

of  one  organ  alone,  sometimes  through  two  or  more,  producing  there- 
by a  corresponding  diversity  of  effect,  and  that  beneficial  or  injurious 
according  as  the  nature  of  such  combinations  may  be  harmonious  or 
the  reverse.  If  such  be  the  case,  the  sensorium  may,  not  inaptly,  be 
likened  to  a  vast  organ  (musical)  of  an  equal  number  of  stops,  all 
called  into  operation  through  the  agency  of  one  great  uniform  princi- 
pie,  the  wind,  collected  in  a  reservoir  or  bellows,  which  is  distributed 
through  appropriate  channels  or  pipes,  framed  in  conformity  to  the 
intentions  of  the  maker,  as  a  flute,  a  trumpet  or  other  musical  instru- 
ment. By  opening  one  or  more  of  those  stops,  alone  or  in  combina- 
tion, a  concert  is  produced,  harmonious  or  otherwise,  according  to  the 
judicious  or  faulty  association  of  the  musician ;  that  is,  exactly  in  the 
ratio  in  which  the  respective  notes  are  caused  to  combine.  The  fine 
and  delicate  notes  of  the  flute  can  scarcely  associate  correctly  with  the 
loud  and  martial  notes  of  the  trumpet  or  the  drum,  or  they  would 
probably  be  overpowered  in  the  louder  manifestation  of  those  instru- 
ments. 

An  organ  may  be  perfect  in  the  hands  of  the  musician  in  the  mani- 
festation of  a  single  stop  alone  ;  it  becomes  improved  by  the  addition 
of  two  or  more,  progressively  in  number,  up  to  the  full  extent  of  its 
construction ;  each  in  itself  is  perfect,  yet  the  cooperation  of  all  is 
essential  to  the  highest  state  of  harmony  for  which  the  instrument 
was  intended,  because  all  the  exquisite  combinations  or  manifestations 
of  sound,  constituting  the  concert,  could  not  be  known,  save  from  the 
associated  action  of  every  part. 

May  we  not  affirm  that  thus  it  is  with  the  mind  or  soul,  and  the 
organ  by  which  it  is  developed,  the  brain,  acting  through  appropriate 
and  constituted  channels.'  The  mind  is  there,  but  should  some  organ 
be  defective,  or  altogether  wanting,  through  which  it  was  intended  to 
operate  ;  that  operation  must  necessarily  be  wanting  or  defective  also. 
The  intellect  is  consequently  extensive  and  perfect,  in  the  ratio  of  the 
number  and  perfection  of  the  organs  through  which  the  soul  performs 
its  part:— hence  the  chain  of  intellect  from  that  of  man,  down  to  the 
lowest  order  of  animal  life — improved  in  some  by  education — in  others 
restrained  to  one  fixed  and  unvaried  standard,  called  instinct,  supply, 
ing  adequately  all  their  wants,  which  are  wisely  limited  to  a  few  par 
ticulars,  beyond  which  they  have  no  aspirations,  to  perplex  and  worry 
them. 


80 

ous  are  the  questions  that  present  themselves  as  to  the  deterio- 
ration of  the  faculties  of  both  body  and  mind,  arising  from 
effusion  of  water  or  blood,  from  tumours  in  the  brain,  from  gas- 
tric and  other  intestinal  affections,  from  hypochondriasis,  phre- 
nitis,  apoplexy  and  various  other  diseases;  and  further  re- 
quiring to  be  informed  how  it  is,  that  "  the  soul,  secure  in  its 
existence,"  is  nevertheless  compelled  to  follow  in  its  opera- 
tions, and  to  evince  them  to  the  world,  precisely  in  the  degree 
of  perfection  or  imperfection  which  the  bodily  organs  pre- 
scribe, when  under  the  influence  of  morbid  causes ;  or,  when  in 
health,  under  that  of  an  appropriate  or  inappropriate  education  ! 
How  could  madness,  idiocy  or  any  mental  disease  become 
apparent,  or  even  have  an  existence  in  man,  but  for  that  inti- 
mate though  inscrutable  connexion,  and  absolute  dependence 
of  the  soul,  on  the  existing  state  of  healthy  or  unhealthy  ma- 
terial organization?  Sureh^  it  will  not  be  contended  that  the 
soul  is  insane  or  idiotic,  because  of  apparently  imperfect 
actions  through  imperfect  and  diseased  organs !  Nor  can  it 
be  supposed  to  be  restored  to  health  and  original  perfection, 
without  the  previous  recovery  of  those  organs.  It  is  true  we 
cannot  at  all  times  demonstrate  the  lesion  of  those  organs  ;  but 
are  our  imperfect  observations,  (so  greatly  owing  to  the  im- 
perfection of  the  senses  themselves,)  to  be  viewed  as  conclu- 
sive in  opposition  to  facts  of  daily  occurrence,  and  sufficient 
of  themselves  to  establish  the  truth  of  the  great  and  funda- 
mental principles  of  phrenology?  To  myself,  at  least,  it  ap- 
pears that  every  fact  we  are  acquainted  with,  relating  to  the 
physiology  and  pathology  of  the  brain,  if  properly  appreciated, 
can  but  tend  to  add  conviction  of  its  truth;  for  it  is  sufficiently 
obvious  that  the  total,  or  partial  destruction,  or  merely  tem- 
})orary  suspension,  of  the  intellectual  faculties  from  lesions  of 
the  brain,  admit  of  no  explanation  that  does  not  embrace  the 
connexion  and  dependence  of  those  faculties  in  their  opera- 
tions with  the  organization  of  that  viscus !     Any  other  view 


81 

of  the  subject  would  impel  us  to  conclude,  that  the  soul  con- 
sists of  separate  parts,  and  that  it  is  capable  of  subdivision ;  so 
that  the  monomaniac  will  have  that  portion  of  the  soul  insane, 
which  is  connected  with  the  organ  through  which  it  exerts  its 
action,  whilst  all  the  remaining  portion  of  the  soul  may  yet 
continue  in  a  healthy  state  : — if  the  aberration  of  the  individual 
extends  to  a  second  function  or  operation,  a  second  portion  of 
the  soul  must  then  have  become  deranged,  and  thus  onwards, 
ad  infinitum,  to  the  highest  range  of  perfect  madness  of  all  the 
separate  and  independent  parts  of  this  invisible  and  mysterious 
associate  of  the  material  organization  !  But  this  must  surely 
be  the  case,  if  the  doctrine  of  phrenology  is  false,  which 
assigns  locality  to  organs  by  which  alone  the  functions  of  the 
soul  are  externally  perceived.  Can  we  hesitate  then  to  admit 
the  possibility,  the  probability — nay,  I  would  add  the  certainty, 
that  malformation,  or  temporary  disease  of  those  organs  that 
evince  irregularity,  do  thereby  modify  or  distort  the  regular 
train  of  mental  ratiocination,  whilst  yet  the  soul  is  in  its  ac- 
customed health?  The  hypochondriac,  who,  standing  in  a 
corner,  imagines  himself  to  be  a  clock,  and  swings  his  arm  to- 
and-fro  as  its  pendulum,  whilst,  cluck,  cluck,  cluck,  he  gives 
out  for  its  ticking: — The  one  who  thinks  his  legs  are  glass, 
and  carefully  guards  them  from  the  slightest  blow: — with 
hundreds  of  a  like  description,  that  are  frequent  in  the  records 
of  medicine ;  all  these  are  nevertheless,  on  other  subjects  per- 
fectly rational,  and  argue  as  correctly  as  their  neighbours  and 
^associates.  Is  the  soul  here,  partially  deranged,  by  w^hich 
such  strange  vagaries  may  be  thoroughly  elucidated,  without 
any  reference  to  organic  lesion  of  some  part,  by  which  the  fijnc- 
tions  are  rendered  imperfect?  If  so,  we  must  classify  the  in- 
sane as  mono-maniacs — bi-maniacs— tri-maniacs,  &c.  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  faculties  thus  erroneously  developing 
their  actions !  The  Almighty  is  omnipresent  tliroughout  the 
macro-cosm  of  the  Universe ;  whilst  He  has  afforded  to  the  soul 


82 

an  omnipresence  in  the  mic7'o-cosm  of  man  !  the  most  wonder- 
ful work  of  His  creative  power,  with  a  state  of  organization, 
through  which  its  operations  are  effected ;  perfect,  if  those 
organs  are  in  a  perfect  state,  but  defective,  if  under  the  in- 
fluence of  malformation  or  disease.* 

I  may  perhaps  strengthen  all  the  preceding  views  in  favour 
of  Phrenology,  by  a  familiar  and  domestic  truth.  It  may  be 
affirmed,  that  Divine  Intelligence  shines  no  where  more  emi- 
nently conspicuous,  than  in  the  fact,  that  the  powers  of  the 
mind  exactly  quadrate  with  the  state  and  age  of  man.f  In 
infancy,  which  requires  the  care  and  attention  of  parental 
affection,  the  low  ebb  of  the  mental  powers,  calls  for  those 
exertions  in  its  behalf,  which  the  imperfect  state  of  its  own 
organs  is  incapable  of  effecting.  The  soul  of  an  infant  con- 
sidered in  the  abstract,  and  as  unconnected  with  its  corporeal 
mansion,  must  be  regarded  as  equally  perfect  and  complete,  as 
that  of  the  most  accomplished  adult ;  but  could  it  be  equally 

*  These  truths  were  in  a  certain  extent  avowed  by  ancient  philoso- 
phers  : — thus  Socrates  says,  that  while  the  soul  is  immersed  in  matter, 
it  staggers,  strays,  frets,  and  is  giddy,  like  a  man  in  drink,  Plato's 
Phedon. 

f  Even  our  blessed  Saviour,  in  assuming  the  form  of  man,  became 
subject  to  the  laws  of  mental  and  corporeal  improvement  as  established 
by  nature  ;  for  we  learn  from  St.  Luke,  ii.  52 — that  "  Jesus  increased 
in  wisdom  and  stature,  and  in  favour  with  God  and  man." 

Aristotle  asks,  "  Cur  Seniores  amplius  mente  valeamus.?"  and  he 
replies  as  follows,  "  Quia  natura  parens  instrumenta  nobis  duo  in. 
seruit,  Manum  Corpori  dedit,  animo  mentem;  caeterae  scientiae,  et 
artes  nostra  opera  sunt,  mentem  ipsam  opus  esse  naturae  fecundum 
est.  Ut  igitur  manu  non  jam  inde  ab  ortu  uti  possumus,  sed  cum  earn 
absolvit  naturoB,  perfecitque  procedcnte  eetate  ;  ita  mens  non  j)rotinus, 
sed  in  senectute  maxime  nobis  contingit,  atque  tunc  prsecipue  con- 
summatur,  et  absolvitur.  Accedit  vero  posterior  mens,  qucim  manuum 
facultas,  quoniam  mentis  instrumenta  posteriora  sunt,  quam  manuum, 
est  enim  mentis  instrumentum  scientia."  And  Lactantius  says, 
"  Animam  crescere  in  pueris,  vigere  in  juvenibus,  etin  senibus  minui." 


83 

active  and  efficient,  in  the  imperfect  and  partially  developed 
state  of  the  organs  through  whose  channels  its  actions  are  to 
be  effective;  some  of  the  most  delightful  sensations  of  the 
human  breast  would  be  altogether  wanting.  Ilow  could  our 
feelings  be  equally  wrought  upon  by  the  infant  pledges  of 
affection,  if  the  operations  of  the  mind,  in  them,  w^ere  perfect 
as  our  own?  The  gradual  unfolding  of  their  faculties  by  the 
progressive  improvement  of  their  corporeal  organization,  con- 
stitutes, I  apprehend,  the  powerful  chain  that  binds  the  parent 
so  closely  to  his  offspring:  for,  we  must  admit,  that  a  full  and 
perfect  intellect  at  birth,  would  subvert,  or  annihilate  that 
peculiar  and  tender  affection  so  natural  from  man,  even  in  the 
savage  state,  and  not  less  powerful  in  brutes,  towards  their 
helpless  progeny  !  The  tie  that  connects  us  to  our  children  at 
the  age  of  maturity,  when  the  full  development  of  their  mental 
powers  places  them  on  an  equality  with  ourselves,  is  produced 
assuredly,  by  a  feeling' of  a  far  different  nature  from  that 
which  their  infant  state  elicits ;  and  it  is  from  this  very  cir- 
cumstance, I  think,  that  children  can  never  experience  the 
same  peculiar  sensations  for  the  parent,  which  the  latter  feels 
for  them. 

Before  I  bring  this  essay  to  a  close,  I  will  venture  to  add  to 
it  a  fact,  which,  although  apparently  more  immediately  con- 
nected with  physiognomy,  (a  branch,  however,  of  phrenology,) 
is,  if  well  founded,  not  undeserving  of  consideration,  and  of 
more  extensive  observation.      It  is  noiv  upwards  of*  forty 


*The  position  here  assumed,  which  I  thought  was  altogether  my 
own,  I  have  latterly  found  to  have  been  indirectly  adverted  to,  in  a 
very  curious  work,  by  Gaspar  a  Reies  Franco,  printed  at  Brussels  1641^ 
Fol.  p.  399,  entitled  "  Elysius  Jucundorum  Quaestionum  Campus,"  &c. 
One  of  the  questions  considered,  is  upon  the  subject  of  the  similarity 
of  persons — and  numerous  examples  are  given,  many  of  great  interest, 
and  derived  from  ancient  and  modern  writers ;  referring  to  some  of 
these,  he  thus  expresses  himself:  "  Nee  minus  mirandum,  quod,  hi  in- 


84 

years  since  the  idea  presented  itself  to  me,  owing  to  some  ac- 
cidental circumstance,  and  since  that  time,  I  have  confirmed  it 
satisfactorily  to  myself,  by  several  hundred  instances.  I  have 
repeatedly  mentioned  it  to  many  friends  and  acquaintances, 
who  have  also  coincided  in  the  opinion,  from  their  own  sub- 
sequent observations. 

The  fact  I  wish  to  establish,  is,  that  whenever  the  general 
physiognomy  of  two  individuals  is  the  same,  that  is,  when, 
according  to  common  observation,  two  persons  are  said  to 
resemble  each  other,  (in  face)  or  to  be  alike;  so,  in  the  same 
degree  or  extent  of  resemblance,  will  their  voices  be  found  to 
be  the  same;  so  that,  if  in  the  dark,  I  should  hear  the  voice  of 
an  individual  that  resembled  the  voice  of  another  person  with 
whom  I  was  acquainted,  I  should  have  no  difficulty  in  affirm- 
ing, that  on  seeing  his  face,  I  should  find  a  resemblance  also 
in  it,  to  that  of  the  other.  So,  in  like  manner,  should  I  see  an 
unknown  person,  in  the  most  distant  place,  whose  countenance 
and  features  resembled  those  of  a  well  known  friend  or  acquaint- 
ance, T  would  venture  to  affirm  at  once,  that  in  voice,  he  would 
likewise  resemble  him.  Could  we  therefore  be  assured  of  the 
likeness  of  the  busts  and  portraits  of  ancient  heroes,  kings, 
philosophers  and  other  great  men  that  have  reached  us,  and 

quibus  tanta  intervenit  similitudo,  ut  nee  vultu,  voce,  loquela,  corpore, 
actionibus,  aut  exercitiis  diseerni  possint,  moribus  quoque  et  animi 
afFeetibus  etiam  cohcereant ;  quae  enim  inter  se  similia  adeo  sunt,  eadem 
temperie,  aut  saltern  parem  distante  ita  conveniunt,  ut  vitiis  aut  vir* 
tutibus  eisdem  insigniantur,"  &c. — with  more  to  the  like  effect,  by 
which  it  will  be  seen,  that  the  views  taken  on  the  subject,  are  far 
more  extended  than  I  had  ventured  to  adopt.  They  serve,  however, 
to  substantiate  my  more  limited  proposition.  It  is  but  lately  that  I 
have  met  with  the  facts  to  which  I  thus  allude.  I  may  add,  that  the 
author  amidst  his  numerous  references,  adds  one  from  Virgil,  8th 
^neid — on  Evander  recognising  .^neas,  from  the  similarity  of  voice 
and  face  to  his  father  Anchises. 

"  Et  voccm  Anchisce  magni,  vidlusque  recorder  !" 


85 

find  individuals  of  similar  features,  we  might,  prima  facie,  re- 
cognise in  their  voices,  the  voices  of  their  precursors.* 

No  doubt  at  first  sight,  this  will  be  deemed  extravagant,  and 
devoid  of  foundation;  but  the  fact  is,  that  it  has  a  foundation 
in  the  organization  of  the  parts  themselves,  and  must,  there- 
fore, be  strictly  true.  To  what  shall  we  ascribe  the  basis 
of  a  similar  set  of  features  in  different  individuals  of  the  past 
or  present  times?  Evidently,  the  only  sure  and  fixed  basis, 
must  be  the  bony  fabric  of  the  face  and  fauces.  If  the  muscles 
and  covering  of  those  bones  are  not  dissimilarly  located  or 
attached ;  in  other  words,  if  the  various  parts,  through  which 
the  air  emitted  from  the  lungs  in  speech,  are  anatomically  alike 
in  both,  the  appearance  externally  must  necessarily  approxi- 

*  The  following  extracts  are  in  a  measure  corroborative  of  this 
opinion.  The  first  is  from  "  Strang's  Germany  in  1831  ;"  the  latter, 
from  the  Ledger  of  March  22d,  1845— extracted  from  the  London 
Morning  Herald  : 

"  Metternich. — On  the  first  glimpse  which  I  had  of  the  Austrian 
Prime  Minister,  I  fancied  I  beheld  the  Duke  of  Wellington;  but  on 
a  second  look  I  discovered  that  his  face  was  fuller  and  much  less  sharp 
and  haggard  than  that  of  the  hero  of  Waterloo.  There  is,  however, 
a  very  singular  resemblance  in  the  great  lines  and  character  of  their 
faces.  The  contour  of  the  visage  is  the  same  in  each;  the  expression 
about  the  mouth  is  not  unlike;  while  the  self-complacence  which 
plays  on  both  countenances,  indicating  a  feeling  of  conscious  supe- 
riority, is  remarkably  similar.  With  so  near  a  resemblance  of  face, 
perhaps  it  is  not  remarkable  that  their  political  feeling  should  be  so 
much  akin;  and  if  we  may  be  permitted  to  quote  Lavater  as  an  au- 
thority, it  is  not  at  all  surprising  to  find  that  features  which  are  hourly 
affected  with  the  sentiment  that  mankind  ought  still  to  be  ruled  by 
the  same  engine  which  ambition,  bigotry,  and  heartlessness  invented, 
should  come  within  the  prescribed  limits  of  the  similarity  which  that 
ingenious  but  f  iiciful  author  assigns  to  brother  characters." 

"  Miss  Cushman,  who  played  Bianca,  is  a  tall,  commanding  young 
lady,  having  a  fine  stage  figure.  The  expression  of  her  face  is  curious ; 
it  reminds  one  of  Macready ;  a  suggestion  still  further  strengthened 
by  the  tones  of  her  voice,  and  frequently  by  her  mode  of  speech." 

H 


86 

mate  in  each,  unless  prevented  by  some  accidental  cause.  But, 
since  a  similarity  of  external  configuration  affords  the  strongest 
reason  for  concluding  that  the  internal  and  unseen  parts  are 
equally  similar  in  formation  and  structure;  the  air  passing 
through  channels  of  like  configuration  in  the  various  passages 
of  the  mouth  and  fauces,  must  necessarily  afford  a'similar 
sound,  and  if  employed  in  speech,  will  render  that  alike  in 
both  cases,  just  as  in  two  musical  instruments  of  the  same 
construction,  attuned  to  the  same  pitch.  Without  attempting 
iurther  explanation,  I  must  repeat  my  firm  conviction  of  the 
truth  of  my  assertion ;  I  have  verified  it  too  often  to  entertain 
the  shghtest  doubt  upon  the  subject,  and  submit  it  to  the  further 
attention  of  my  readers.  At  the  same  time,  I  must  request  them 
to  remember,  that,  as  all  persons  do  not  discover  resemblances 
with  equal  facility,  they  must  not  be  discouraged  from  the 
pursuit,  if  this  should  be  their  case.  No  doubt,  every  person 
has  at  times  been  much  surprised,  that  he  has  seen  at  once  a 
striking  likeness  in  a  portrait,  to  the  individual  for  whom  it  was 
painted,  whilst  others  around,  as  intimately  acquainted  with  that 
individual,  shall  deny  its  having  any  resemblance.  Now,  for 
such  diversity  of  opinion  there  surely  must  be  some  adequate  ex- 
planation; and  I  imagine  this  to  be,  its  dependance  greatly,  if 
not  entirely,  on  the  accidental  circumstance  of  the  one,  at  the 
first  glance  at  the  portrait  being  promptly  impressed  by  one  or 
more  features  that  have  been  happily  and  faithfully  traced  by  the 
artist,  whilst  the  others,  unfortunately  striking  on  a  feature  not 
accurately  given,  or  altogether  erroneous,  will  never  see  the 
face  but  under  this  false  aspect,  the  first  impression  will  always 
predominate;  that  is,  the  erroneous  features  will  invariably 
stand  forth  in  bold  relief;  whilst  the  exact  reverse  attends  the 
other,  who  will  invariably  behold  those,  by  which  the  likeness 
was  first  established  in  his  mind.  If  every  feature  was  cor- 
rectly given,  there  could  be  no  second  opinion  respecting  the 
case,  for  all  would  see  the  painting  uniformly.     Such  I  appro- 


87 

hend  may  be  the  case  in  the  above  noticed  physiognomical 
association  of  voice  and  feature,  for  although  a  strong  resem- 
blance may  exist  between  two  persons,  yet  still,  individual  fea- 
tures may  vary,  which  will  create  doubts  as  to  likeness,  in 
those  who  do  not  at  first  attach  themselves  to  those  features 
that  are  similar.* 

In  conclusion,  I  must  remark,  that  so  far  from  the  science 
of  phrenology  being  a  newly  discovered  one,  it  is,  on  the  con- 
trary, one  of  the  most  ancient.  I  have  in  my  possession  a 
very  curious  old  quarto  volume,  printed  in  1508,  entitled  "  Mar- 
garita Philosophica" — a  kind  of  Encyclopedia,  embracing  in 
question  and  answer,  between  the  master  and  his  pupil,  every 
science  of  the  day,  from  the  letters  in  the  horn  book,  up  to 
theology  and  metaphysics.  Among  the  singular  engravings 
with  which  it  abounds  is  one  of  a  human  head  or  skull,  on 
which  are  regularly  depicted  by  metes  and  boundaries,  the 
then  acknowledged  faculties  of  the  mind,  in  their  respective 
localities,  with  a  precision  notunworthy  of  Gall  or  Spurzheim. 
Well  did  Solomon  declare  that  there  is  "  nothing  new  under 
the  sun."  Doubtless  the  science  of  phrenology  existed  in  the 
distant  epoch  of  the  Jewish  monarch,  although  its  principles 
had  not  been  fully  elucidated.  It  is,  however,  perfectly  demon- 
strable, that,  neither  before  nor  since  the  time  of  Solomon, 
have  the  organs  of  amativeness  and  of  philoprogenitiveness 
exhibited  a  stronger  development  than  in  his  brain;  for  we 
have  scriptural  assurance,  that  this  illustrious  and  ivisest  of 
monarchs,  had  no  less  than  seven  hundred  wives  and  three 
hundred  concubines!  His  conscience  on  those  points  must 
have  had  but  a  feeble  development ! 

*  Who  has  not  discovered  likenesses  to  man,  brutes,  castles,  &c.,  in 
the  polished  variegated  slabs  of  our  marble  mantels,  which  others  can- 
not always  readily  detect ;  whilst  various  figures  of  a  different  charac- 
ter are  detected  in  the  same  ?  Each  will,  in  all  future  investigation,  still 
recognise  the  appearances  which  his  imagination  had  first  invented. 


88 

About  a  century  after  the  work  above  mentioned,  appeared 
a  treatise  by  J.  Heurnius,  a  medical  writer  of  very  superior 
merit,  entitled  "  De  morbis  qui  in  singulis  partibus  humani 
capitis  insidere  consueverunt."  At  ch.  x.  p.  100  of  this  work, 
speaking  of  phrenitis  and  its  various  forms,  he  says  "  Secundo, 
differunt  phrenitides  loco  affecto :  nam  vel  totum  cerebrum,  vel 
ejus  pars  occupata  est.  Si  pars  cerebri,  ea  erit  antica,  postica, 
vel  media.  Scio  hie  disputari^  utrum  principes  facultates 
capitis,  sedes  in  cerebro  habeant  varias,  necne,"  &c. ;  from 
which  it  is  evident,  that  the  doctrine  of  localities  was  then  a 
subject  of  discussion.  It  is,  however,  so  rational,  that  it  can 
scarcely  be  a  source  of  wonder,  to  find  that  even  centuries  be- 
fore that  period,  the  same  opinion  had  met  with  supporters. 
Accordingly  we  learn  that  Galen,  (the  most  renowned  of  the 
medical  profession  in  any  age,  either  ancient  or  modern,)  who 
flourished  about  200  years  after  our  Saviour,  had  promulgated 
and  sustained  a  similar  doctrine.  Heurnius  refers  us  in  proof 
of  this,  to  Aph :  27  of  1st  Prorrhetics ;  and  to  his  4th  book, 
de  Locis  affectis,  in  which  he  says,  that  when  the  brain  is 
affected,  "apud  anticos  ventres  suos  laedi  imaginationem:  sin 
illi  medios  secum  ventriculos  trahant,  perverti  et  cogitationem." 
He  elsewhere  inquires,  why  phrenitis  has  such  varied  symp- 
toms ;  and  why,  at  one  time,  the  imagination,  at  another, 
thought  or  memory  shall  be  defective  ?  "  Hoc  evenit  (says 
he)  ex  humoris  raptu  ab  una  in  aliam  cerebri  partem :  itaque 
hoc  fieri  ex  variariim  cerebri  mansionum  irritatione,  et  altera- 
tione  prsegrandi,  undo  successiva  opera  <puvru(;rixii,  r.ysvoviKH, 
et  itAit}fx,ov£vri)cii,  id  est  facultatum  apprchendendi,  judicandi,  et 
memorandi."  Further  on,  we  find,  "Si  principes  facultates 
quaj  in  cerebro  habitant,  varias  mansiones  occupant,  igitur 
unus  idemque  homo  poterit  ingcniosus  esse,  vique  imaginandi 
excellere,  et  etiam  memorandi  potentid  alios  ante-ire ;  at  ple- 
rumque  ingeniosi  immemores  sunt :  quin  non  raro  memoria 
valide  exsplendescente,  torpescit  imaginatio,"  &c. — And   in 


89 

"  Galeni,  de  Hippoc :  et  Plat :  decretis,  Lib.  5.  ch.  4,  we  find 
the  following  :  "  Neque  in  una  tantum  animse  parte,  neque  in 
una  facultate  et  judicia  et  affectus  existere,  ut  Chrysippus 
sentit ;  sed,  plures  esse  diversasque  genere  turn  facultates,  turn 
partes."*  We  need  not  to  quote  further;  although  we  might 
abundantly,  for  the  writings  of  Galen  prove  the  subject  to 
have  been  a  favourite  with  him.  It  wanted  merely  a  name  to 
establish  its  scientific  standing ;  and  I  have  merely  adduced 
the  above  few  extracts,  to  prove  that  phrenology  is  not  now 
for  the  first  time  illustrated,  but  that  it  reaches  back  through 
^sixteen  centuries,  if  not  to  the  time  of  Hippocrates,  who  lived 
nearly  400  years  before  Galen. 

I  have  now  completed  the  object  I  had  in  view,  of  main- 
taining the  firm  belief  I  have  long  had  of  the  truth  of  the  great 
outlines  and  fundamental  principles  of  phrenology,  a  belief 
unalloyed,  I  trust,  by  any  slavish  attachment  to  the  vagaries  to 
which  it  may  have  given  rise.  It  is  a  science,  which,  though 
of  long  standing,  as  I  have  demonstrated,  is  nevertheless  still 
in  its  infancy,  and  will  probably  so  continue,  until  augmented 
elucidation  shall  have  established  a  chain  of  facts  so  powerful, 
as  to  enforce  a  general  opinion,  that,  so  far  from  its  considera- 
tion leading  to  infidelity  or  atheism,  as  many  have  affirmed, 
on  the  contrary  it  tends  to  magnify  the  power  of  the  Deity  in 
the  manifestation  of  that  part  of  His  works,  that  is  to  survive 
"  the  wreck  of  matter  and  the  crush  of  worlds !" 

*  "  Quid  enim  rari  habet  phrenitis,  quid  admirationis  ?  An  quod 
prsecipuam  animae  functionem,  rationem  inquam,  et  hominis  sacrarium 
vitiet,  et  perturbet? — Minimc  quidem ;  quia  phrenitis  rationem  pro- 
•prih  non  ladit,  sed  illius  orgnnum  turbat  et  vitiat  ac  optimam  illius 
temperiem  corrumpit,  unde  defectu  instrunienti  rationi  advenit  no- 
cumentum." — Campus  Elysius,  p.  742. 

THE    END. 


